MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1794053993 · doi:10.3968/6307

The Exploration and Practice of Humanization-Based Teaching Mode: Taking the Humanistic Teaching of Political Economy for Example

2015· article· en· W1794053993 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xiuli Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher education of social science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIdeological and Political Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanityHumanismPoliticsHumanistic educationMathematics educationPsychologySociologyMode (computer interface)Engineering ethicsPedagogyComputer sciencePolitical scienceEngineeringLawHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Humanization-based education is student-oriented that fits into the development of human nature, keeps shaping and perfecting humanity, and unlocks the best of the individuals’ potential. The concept of humanization-based education must be reflected by humanistic teaching. During exploring its way forward in practice, humanistic teaching follows the principles to regard people as the end not instrument, concern with individual differences, respect the students’ demands, make the very most of the students’ gifts, dovetail knowledge into the system of values, and cultivate people of all-round development and profuse humanity. This study takes the teaching of political economy for example to explore the humanization-based education, designs the questionnaire aimed at the students, analyses the investigation statistically, hereby gets relatively deep knowledge of the students’ learning demands and their own learning information, and finally come up with the key points and specific measures of the humanistic teaching mode.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.014
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher education of social scienceSame topicIdeological and Political EducationFrench-language works237,207