MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396955549 · doi:10.5539/hes.v14n2p170

Factors Influencing Pre-Service Technical Teachers' Academic Performance: Cross-Sectional Study

2024· article· en· W4396955549 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sukit Chiranorawanit, Vitsanu Nittayathammakul

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher Education Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology-Enhanced Education Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCross-sectional studyAcademic achievementHigher educationPsychologyMedical educationMathematics educationMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research aims to identify factors predicting pre-service technical teachers’ academic performance in a technical teacher training context. This study employed a predictive correlational design. We developed the conceptual framework by combining previous research, and then created a survey to gather data. Between August 1 and August 30, 2022, 109 undergraduates from the Faculty of Technical Education at Rajamangala University of Technology Krungthep (RMUTK) received an online self-administered questionnaire. The statistical analysis employed the Pearson correlation coefficient and multiple regression. The findings of the research showed that there was a positive correlation between various factors such as gender, motivation and attitude towards learning, study habits, family support, curriculum quality, and teaching quality with pre-service technical teachers' academic performance, with the correlation coefficients ranged from .230 to .292 and were all statistically significant (p < 0.05). The multiple correlation coefficient (R) was .474 showed a significant relationship between the independent and dependent variables at the .05 level. The R-squared value was .225, indicating that these six variables combined explain 22.5% of the variation in academic performance. However, this also suggests that our model fails to explain around 77.5% of the variance. Some aspects of the findings derived from this study are expected to result in the creation of digital interventions to better track students' academic performance, aiming to provide equitable educational experiences that maximize the academic performance of each gender group in the future.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.158
GPT teacher head0.488
Teacher spread0.330 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher Education StudiesSame topicTechnology-Enhanced Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207