MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2382630440

On the Three-dimension Examination of the Development Status Quo of Educational Administrative Science

2004· article· en· W2382630440 on OpenAlexaff
LI Bao-qiang

Bibliographic record

VenueKyouikugaku no kenkyuu to jissen · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHigher Education and Teaching Methods
Canadian institutionsScience North
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatus quoAdministration (probate law)Educational administrationProfessionalizationSubject (documents)SociologyPolitical scienceVirtuePublic administrationEngineering ethicsPedagogyHigher educationSocial scienceComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main development of educational administrative science is the development of subject, academic research and idea. The representation of the subject's development is that the nature's belonging is shifted, the object and range expanded, the structure system classified and the research approach renovated. The forward subjects of the academic research are the meta-research of critical reflective thinking and educational administration, the educational administration probing of practice and issue orientation, the educational efficiency and the administration of manpower resources, the knowledge administration and educational administration innovation, the educational policy analysis and the administration comments, the headmaster or president's professionalization and the self-diagnosis of the school organization culture, the school management and its relation with the community, management of the school with the rule of virtue and the school-based management. The real developmental trend of its ideas is that science and humanity are blended, right and responsibility equalized, competition and cooperation united, inheritance and innovation combined, sustainable development and green administration interacting.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.896
Threshold uncertainty score0.389

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKyouikugaku no kenkyuu to jissenSame topicHigher Education and Teaching MethodsFrench-language works237,207