MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401136348 · doi:10.46932/sfjdv5n7-033

Estrategias efectivas para el desarrollo de la competencia emocional del docente de nivel superior

2024· article· es· W4401136348 on OpenAlexaff
Ericka Paola Rodríguez Bautista, Moran Arevalo Angelica Anania, González Rodríguez Liliana Katherine

Bibliographic record

VenueSouth Florida Journal of Development · 2024
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldPsychology
TopicStress and Burnout Research
Canadian institutionsMinistère de l’Emploi et de la Solidarité Sociale (Québec)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Las investigaciones han constatado que los docentes universitarios enfrentan mayores riesgos, puesto que, se exponen diariamente a un trabajo que requiere alta implicación emocional para abordar diversos desafíos. La presente investigación tiene como finalidad: Explorar las estrategias efectivas para el desarrollo de las competencias emocionales en docentes del nivel superior. La metodología fue cuantitativa de alcance descriptivo-transversal. El muestreo por conveniencia permitió recopilar datos en 30 docentes universitarios mediante una encuesta diseñada con 10 preguntas relacionadas a las variables de estudio. Mientras que el procesamiento de datos se analizó en el software estadístico IBM SPSS. Lo resultados revelan que los docentes, en su mayoría, presentaron aspectos positivos en las competencias emocionales, aunque un grupo minoritario aún requiere fortalecerlas. Asimismo, se identificaron estrategias efectivas de formación y desarrollo profesional, pero persisten desafíos en cuanto al apoyo institucional, lo cual afecta la implementación y efectividad de dichas estrategias para fomentar el desarrollo emocional de todo el cuerpo docente.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 venueSouth Florida Journal of DevelopmentSame topicStress and Burnout ResearchFrench-language works237,207