MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2368403740

Combing Core Items and Additional Items:Essence of Student Evaluation Index System of Educational Quality(SEEQ)of Universities in Canada——The Case of University of Manitoba

2013· article· en· W2368403740 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zhou Ji-lian

Bibliographic record

VenueComparative Education Review · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEvaluation and Optimization Models
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndex (typography)Quality (philosophy)DemocracyHumanismCore competencyFlexibility (engineering)Core (optical fiber)SociologyPersonalityMathematics educationPsychologyComputer scienceMedical educationManagementPolitical scienceMarketingBusinessSocial psychologyMedicineLawPoliticsEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The University of Manitoba is the first university in the western Canada,the largest and only research intensive university in the region.The SEEQ(Student Evaluation of Educational Quality)and its corresponding program is the main tool of teaching evaluation,which embodies the university's special management style and humanistic ideas.The index system of SEEQ is composed of core items and additional items which complement mutually and are organically unified.Both core items and additional items are used to evaluate teaching to realize the goal of teaching quality assessment.The index system design and SEEQ'S system arrangement reflect the important management ideas of the university:attaching equal importance to both science and democracy and interlinking rigidity and flexibility.In our country,we should enhance the scientific nature of index system of student evaluation of teaching,give more space for democratic participation,respect teacher's personality and encourage teachers to innovate in teaching.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 topicEvaluation and Optimization ModelsFrench-language works237,207