MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991592120 · doi:10.5539/ass.v11n4p213

Features of the Programs Applied Bachelor Degree in Secondary and Higher Vocational Education

2015· article· en· W1991592120 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Elmira R. Khairullina, Azat S. Valeyev, Gyuzel Khusainovna Valeyeva, Nailya Sh. Valeyeva, Андрей Лейфа, Elena A. Burdukovskaya, Albina R. Shaidullina

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering and Environmental Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBachelorVocational educationBachelor degreeHigher educationMathematics educationDegree (music)Realization (probability)Associate degreeMedical educationDegree programPedagogySociologyPsychologyPolitical scienceMedicineMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article aims to identify features of the implementation of the programs applied bachelor degree in secondary and higher vocational education. The article presents the initial results of the implementation of applied bachelor programs in institutions of higher and secondary vocational education, identifies the peculiarities of application programs and academic bachelor degree, justifies organizational and pedagogical conditions applied baccalaureate programs, highlights the advantages and disadvantages associated with realization of the programs applied bachelor degree in education institutions of higher and secondary vocational education. The article may be useful in the development of requirements for the content formation of the theoretical and practical training of applied bachelor degree in higher and secondary vocational education; program design methods for the study of applied bachelor degree in vocational education.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Other
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Other designlow
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designObservational · Other design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical · Other

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

Citations26
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicEngineering and Environmental StudiesFrench-language works237,207