MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2356076854

Why the “golden key” plans of promoting the development of students are given up halfway?——Inspiration from the two development models of school education in Russia and America

2013· article· en· W2356076854 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zhu Xing-gu

Bibliographic record

VenueComparative Education Review · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational and Psychological Assessments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKey (lock)Mathematics educationDevelopment (topology)Political scienceEconomic growthFoundation (evidence)Education theorySociologyPedagogyHigher educationPsychologyEconomicsComputer scienceLawMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current direction of the educational reform targets at giving each student equal chance for development,which focuses on breaking through the traditional educational theory with knowledge acquisition as its goal.At the end of the twentieth century,the golden keyplan in Russia and the Sudbury valley school in the United States both used Vygotsky's development theory as the foundation,regarding promoting students' development as the goal and introducing great reforms not only in teaching organization but also in teaching contents.Through the study on the inherent necessity and innovation of the two models which appeared and disappeared almost at the same time,we try to analyze the causes of their success or failure,which is beneficial to seek the efficient way to explore the development of education reform.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.012
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.297 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComparative Education ReviewSame topicEducational and Psychological AssessmentsFrench-language works237,207