The Role of Psychologists in Highlighting the Importance of School Ergonomics on the Educational Process from the Perspective of School Teachers in Jordanian Society
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to identify the role played by psychologists in highlighting the importance of school ergonomics to the educational process, from the perspective of school teachers in Jordanian society, to achieve the study’s objective, the researchers used the descriptive analytical approach to suit this study, where a questionnaire was distributed to a sample of teachers amounting to (88) male and female teachers in Irbid Governorate in Jordan. The questionnaire included three fields, which are (equipment and public facilities, school activities, guidance and mental health) at a rate of (27) paragraphs for each, The study results concluded that the psychologist plays a significant role in highlighting the importance of school ergonomics and its components in the educational process and academic achievement, this was evident in all fields, with public facilities and equipment ranking first, the researcher recommends that school administration and relevant authorities, particularly the Ministry of Education, develop school ergonomics to keep pace with the modern era, the spread of digital technology, and its importance to the educational process.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".