MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138537568

Review of Doctoral Programs in Technical Education

2007· article· en· W2138537568 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Holly Baltzer, Edward J. Lazaros, James Flowers

Bibliographic record

VenueISU Red - Research and eData (Illinois State University) · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Teaching and Evaluation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of South FloridaUniversity of ManitobaNorth Carolina State UniversityUniversity of North TexasVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State UniversityWestern Michigan UniversityOklahoma State UniversityOhio State UniversityUniversity of MinnesotaPurdue University
KeywordsVariety (cybernetics)Vocational educationMedical educationHigher educationPedagogySnapshot (computer storage)SociologyEngineering ethicsPolitical scienceEngineeringComputer scienceMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article describes the third phase of a study which examined the readiness of technology education and career and technical education fields for online and hybrid doctoral degree programs in technical education. In this phase, interviews were conducted with chairs and coordinators of 19 doctoral programs in the US and Canada, creating a snapshot of existing doctoral programs in technical education, to inform those undertaking doctoral program design or revision of the variety of approaches to doctoral education. Findings may also be useful to those pursuing employment as faculty members in institutions such as these, and to those considering doctoral study in the field.

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 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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.069
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.069
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0140.016
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.212
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations18
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISU Red - Research and eData (Illinois State University)Same topicHigher Education Teaching and EvaluationFrench-language works237,207