MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evaluation of Guidance Teachers' Guidance Competence and Professional Development Processes

2025· article· en· W4411567319 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Growth Evaluation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Leadership and Administration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompetence (human resources)Professional developmentPsychologyEngineering ethicsMedical educationPedagogyEngineeringMedicineSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to evaluate guidance teachers' guidance competence levels and attitudes towards professional development processes. The changing structure of education systems requires students' increasing psychosocial needs and multidimensional crisis environments, the professional roles and competencies of guidance teachers. Guidance adequacy not only includes the theoretical knowledge, but also multifaceted professional equipment such as effective communication skills, commitment to ethical principles and openness to development. In this context, in the study, the competences that guidance teachers should have are defined within the theoretical framework; The applications in Türkiye and the guidance systems in countries such as Finland, USA, Canada and New Zealand have been examined. The findings from the literature screening and the current research on the field show that guidance teachers are mostly engaged in administrative duties in Turkey, that they have difficulty in implementing their competences and that they cannot systematically participate in their professional development processes. In international practices, the roles of guidance teachers are defined more clearly, their professional development is supported by legal obligations and guidance services are carried out more systematically. At the end of the study, it is recommended that the task definitions of guidance teachers in Türkiye should be clarified, the creation of a competence system based on ethical and professional standards and that institutional structures that support continuous professional development should be strengthened.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.353
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.207
GPT teacher head0.529
Teacher spread0.323 · 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