MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Studies on the Course System Characteristics of British Open Universities and Inspiration to Chinese Open University Education

2012· article· en· W1815667351 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jing Sun, Bing Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher education of social science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Educational Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumQuality (philosophy)Professional developmentSustainable developmentHigher educationSociologyCurriculum developmentPedagogyPolitical scienceEngineering ethicsMathematics educationEngineeringPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

British open universities are generally people-oriented in the organization of professional curriculum, and achieve flexible and efficient professional setting, curriculum development, curriculum system development, etc.. British open universities’ professional curriculum setting and management model are the core elements of guarantee for their high quality teaching. Chinese open universities need to use the British open universities for reference and learn from their successful experience in professional curriculum organization, and establish a people-oriented, open education philosophy. At the same time, Chinese universities should constantly improve the professional curriculum development, focusing on using the modern educational technology, and monitor the teaching quality, and really achieve the sustainable development of modern distance education. Key words : British open universities; Professional curriculum; International; Innovation

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.146

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.357 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher education of social scienceSame topicInnovative Educational TechniquesFrench-language works237,207