Self- and Peer Assessment in Massive Open Online Courses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present paper is concerned about the Greek educational policy throughout 2008-2013, which is related to teachers’ evaluation and their teaching work, in comparison to the one implemented in 1981. The investigation is focused on Primary and Secondary Education in which the policy of intentions as well as legislation are concentrated on a form of evaluation in successive levels. In this respect, the dysfunctions or discords of the educational system, which theoretically impede or make difficult the effective educational work performance, are interpreted under different terms. The issue of evaluating teachers is of special interest because Papandreou’s educational policy, which was implemented in 1981, was conducive to abolishing any form of educators’ control and superintendence. This way emphasis was placed on a policy by which the teacher was supposed to co-operate with school counselors, namely advisors who collaborated with teachers, working independently within the educational environment. Since 2008, emphasis has been placed on the teaching work superintendence by school counselors being the ones to determine the teachers’ professional evolution, through an institutionalization of supervision and control procedures. This aspect is also incorporated in the education reform model aiming at its alignment with the European evaluation model.
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 | 0.008 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".