Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article is based on the results of the examination of ten national training models for tourism. The author has analyzed the experience of vocational education in Austria, Australia, great Britain, Germany, Canada, Norway, Russia, Finland, France and Switzerland; the results of the analysis of some national models have been published previously [2]. The aim of this work is the generalization of the leading trends of education in tourism; identification of the most typical parameters of educational systems in situation specialized in foreign education which allow more clearly to represent the ratio of global and national in the Russian model of personnel training for tourism, and justify organizational and pedagogical conditions of functioning of a more effective, innovative model of industrial education in the field of tourism. Sustainable system of relations and common characteristics to all studied models of training personnel for tourism identified in the comparative international study are understood as the trends of educational development in the field of tourism. The article made the following conclusions: 1) the invariant of organizational and pedagogical conditions of development of structure and content possess national characteristics, expressed in the identity management and pedagogical technologies, organization and forms of operation; 2) current situation is characterized by the combination in each of the national model of personnel training for tourism biased and specific features that leads to summarizing an assumption about the value of constructive adaptation of the individual who discovered the bias, the mechanisms of formation of effective models in the Russian model of specialized tourism education.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".