MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7019008318

Exploring Relationships Among Resilience, Engagement, Personality, and Performance in Teacher Education

2019· dissertation· en· W7019008318 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueQSpace (Queen's University Library) · 2019
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPracticumCourseworkBig Five personality traitsConscientiousnessPersonalityExtraversion and introversionPreparednessPsychological resilienceTrait
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Preservice teachers are the future of education and at the pinnacle of contemporary pedagogical practices, which could potentially influence generations of children. Investigating the relationships among preservice teachers’ resilience, engagement, personality traits, and their practicum and coursework performance is critical as it provides rich data for how preservice teachers professionally develop and succeed at the onset of their careers. Resilience, the quality of bouncing back from adversity; engagement, linked to workplace success and burnout, as well as personality, a stable trait of human behavior, are informative and measurable constructs. Self-reported grades on campus and in practicum; as well as self-evaluation on teaching confidence and preparedness are performance metrics in relation to these three psychological constructs. This study administered a five-part 39-item questionnaire to two-cohorts of 139 preservice teachers, one cohort beginning, and the other finishing their teacher education program. Descriptive statistics, factor analysis, correlation and regression analysis were completed. The results of this study indicated that engagement and two personality traits of conscientiousness and extraversion were significantly correlated and predicted four measures of performance. Although resilience was extracted as a single factor according to the BRS (Smith et al., 2008), this variable maintained no correlation to any of the four performance measures and negatively predicted self-evaluation of preparedness for teaching. Engagement was also extracted in a single factor, different from previous models using the ETS (Klassen, Yerdelen, & Durksen, 2013). Personality did not show any coherent factor structure in this study, and items were forced into respective personality factors according to previous work (Rammestedt & John, 2007). This study has important implications for teacher education and for teacher career onset and longevity.

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)0.005
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
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.186 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQSpace (Queen's University Library)→Same topicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies→French-language works237,207→