MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1924217340 · doi:10.3968/6800

Teacher Education Policy Research in China: A Decade Review and Reflection

2015· review· en· W1924217340 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
FU Guang-huai, Yang Lu, Yi-Yin Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher education of social science · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTeacher Professional Development and Motivation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaTeacher educationCertificateProcess (computing)Political sciencePerspective (graphical)Education policyValue (mathematics)Public relationsField (mathematics)Mathematics educationPedagogySociologyHigher educationPsychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nowadays, teacher education in China is at the key period of transition, and has stepped into a process of deepening reform. Thus, teacher education policy has also become a hot topic in education research. Faced with multiple difficulties and dilemmas in the process of teacher education reform, seeking the solution path and guarantee mechanism from the perspective of policy has been the important and difficult topic. Through combing relevant research achievements in teacher education policies, the focus is put on the interest groups and value pursuit of policies for free normal students, teacher qualification certificate, teachers training and teacher mobility. This article aims to grasp the research skeleton and current trends in the field of teacher education policy research, reflect on the problems appeared, and raise more researchers’ attentions and reflections on teacher education policy.

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)0.005
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.018
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.239
GPT teacher head0.580
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher education of social scienceSame topicTeacher Professional Development and MotivationFrench-language works237,207