Self-Development of Pedagogical Competence of Future Teacher
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Relevance of a considered problem is caused by that situation, in which appeared pedagogical education of Russia at present. Absence of clear understanding of prospect of school, of requirements to the modern teacher, of the purposes of students training in the conditions of continuous reformed education brought in pedagogical universities to loss of vision of prospect. Nowadays problems of the teacher’s training are very actual for new school. The info field changes very quickly. Taking into account these factors, it is important to organize process of training of future teachers so that it was enough received tools: methods, receptions, and ways of receiving, processing and transfer of information–in order that adequate to requirements of time to carry out the professional pedagogical activity with the greatest effect. It is possible only at combination of educational training of the student with self-development of pedagogical competence. In article the conditions necessary for formation of motivation to self-development of pedagogical competence of students are considered. And also the main conditions of process of formation of pedagogical competence of future teachers 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it