MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2468443705 · doi:10.5539/res.v8n3p125

Recognition and Applying Character Education Approaches in Schools

2016· article· en· W2468443705 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
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

VenueReview of European Studies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicValues and Moral Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharacter (mathematics)Character educationPsychologyMathematics educationCognitionSociologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>The aim of this study was to recognize the approaches of “character education” and trying to find useful and applicable method for each approach. Making use of a qualitative approach and a descriptive-analytic method, at first, this study attempted to explain the concept of character education by mentioning a brief history it. Then, it is focused on character education approaches and methods derived from them for applying at schools. The findings of this study imply that three major approaches of character education are traditional, developmental-cognitive and care approaches; but in schools, character education programs should be a combination of two or even all three approaches because each approach has some limitations and defects. It seems that the “holistic approach” can increase the chances of success of character education programs.</p>

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.121

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.323
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.086 · 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