The Basic Education Curriculum Reform in Canada in the New Century and its Implication for China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the new century,the enormous pressure of international competition,the complex ethnic issues,declining students grades and lead to drastic changes in social environment lead to the basic eduction reform in Canada.Numerous authoritative acts have been issued in each province to guarantee the smooth development of reform.The Council of Ministers of Education has been founded to coordinate the education plans of different provinces,so that the reform heads to the right direction of favoring students and society.Basic Education Curriculum Reform in Canada tends to combinedecentralizationwithunification,thoughdecentralizationtrend is getting more prominent.It also emphasizes the association with society,and sets up more science courses and practical courses.What's more,it rationally incorporates information technology into curricula,and takes onmulticulturalfeatures.Of course,there are also some problems in the reform.For instance,ill-organized curriculum contents,lack of interprovincial communication,demanding requirements for teachers,overhastiness of the reform,teachers' teaching competence lagging behind,excessive respect paid to students' nature,and lack of systematization in imparting knowledge.Lessons can be drawn from the basic education reform in Canada.Firstly,studentcenterprinciple should be established in basic education reform.Secondly,the administrative power in education needs to be delegated to a proper degree.Thirdly,the irrational parts of science and technology curricula should be reformed.Fourthly,agroup of high quality teachers are to be cultivated.Fifthly,talented administrative staff should be trained.Lastly,education budget should be increased to provide financial support for the curriculum 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".