MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039451711 · doi:10.5539/ass.v11n4p246

Diagnostics of Educational Activity Quality on the Basis of Qualitative Methods

2015· article· en· W2039451711 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Professional Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality (philosophy)Computer scienceProcess (computing)Work (physics)Management scienceProcess managementKnowledge managementBusinessEngineeringEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this article is to research a problem of diagnostics of educational activity efficiency quality increase in professional educational institutions. Presented article shows a technique of diagnostics of educational processes quality on the basis of educational activity results. The concept of general quality management (TQM) acts as the basis of the presented work. It provides the development and continuous improvement of educational activity quality. Quality indicators of educational process and methods of their estimation allow carrying out diagnostics of educational activity and they are given in the article. This article is intended for teachers, researchers, heads of the educational institutions dealing with issues of assessment and improvement of education quality.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.828
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.422
GPT teacher head0.631
Teacher spread0.209 · 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