Civilizational and Cultural Approaches to the Constructing of the Education Content in Kazakhstan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article extremely understudied problem—the development of educational content is considered. Studying of this problem at the present stage, according to the authors, creates conditions for the development and realization of basic methodological guidelines, provides the scientific worldview, allows to trace the genesis of pedagogical positions, pedagogical theories. Combining the two approaches in a single article the authors attempted to determine that the civilizational and cultural approaches have common characteristics. Civilization is a general evaluation of the social culture of life that allows you to “quite organically carry civilizational approach to the field of the world educational process, in the center of which man stands, who is educated and teaches, who develops culture created by previous generations, and transforming himself and the culture in the course of this development”. Civilizational and cultural approaches provide a fundamental rethinking of the role and importance of the education system of Kazakhstan. Opinions of different authors of different historical are reviewed and compared. Such terms as “world civilizations”, “civilization”, and “culture” are disclosed. Each term has a special meaning, character, manifested in different aspects science. Also the essential characteristic of the basic concepts and positions of pedagogy are considered.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".