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 OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.483
Threshold uncertainty score0.706

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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