Teaching Staff Advanced Training in Russia, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the USA and Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In the article the peculiarities in organization of postgraduate teacher training in foreign countries have been highlighted; the basic problems and prospects for advanced training which stipulate for reforming the relevant national systems have been revealed; common and distinctive trends in their development have been justified. In Russia there is a cascade (cyclic) system of teaching staff advanced training, based on the principles of andragogy, namely, continuity, self-control and self-analysis of professional activities by teachers and the use of their own experience during the advanced training. The abovementioned system consists of three phases such as pre-course, course and implementing. Each element of this model is a constituent part of the other, providing cycling and growth. Tasks for teachers are grounded on all the phases of the described system and influence their professional development. In the Republic of Kazakhstan there are three basic systems for teaching staff advanced training, namely, centers of educational excellence at the “Nazarbayev Intellectual Schools”, JSC “National Centre of Teaching Staff Advanced Training” (based on RIPKSO and 16 regional teaching staff advanced training institutes), teaching staff advanced training centres at universities and experimental sections. According to the defined module in the terms of the complex 3-month courses combining face-to-face and online training are provided. In the USA advanced training is provided by multilevel higher educational institutions which offer a wide range of different full-time and distance training programs and some programs are taught directly in educational establishments. The content of advanced training is determined by standards of professional pedagogical education according to the educational program and provides for fundamental, psychological, pedagogical, methodical, IT, practical, social and humanitarian training. Teaching staff advanced training in Canada is provided by various educational establishments, departments of education, school boards, regional centers of education, teachers unions and private providers of professional development services.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".