Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of the present study was to investigate the factors affecting the quality of education in master level of study in psychology and educational sciences departments in Islamic Azad University, Central Tehran Branch.The study population consists of all 376 third and fourth semester master students studying in educational sciences and psychology departments in Islamic Azad University, Central Tehran Branch in academic year 2011-2012.Based on the Krjesi and Morgan table, 191 of them were selected as sample of study using multi-stage stratified sampling method.This research is a descriptive study that was conducted using survey method.Researcher-made questionnaire was used as tool of the study.In order to measure the validity of tools, views of relevant experts were used and Cronbach alpha coefficient was used to calculate its reliability.To test the hypotheses, binomial test statistical calculations were used.The results of data analysis show that except for bachelor GPA of students as a criterion to study at master level of study, the components of department members' participation in developing the objectives of department, composition of faculty members (in terms of work experience and scientific rank) and component of research activities (average professional papers and books published) were effective factors in improving the quality from the point of view of population investigated in this study.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.923 | 0.895 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".