MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2597509400 · doi:10.5539/ies.v10n4p187

The Role of Continuous Education Programs Organized by Saudi Universities in Literacy—A Case Study of King Saud University

2017· article· en· W2597509400 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Haya Saad Abdulla Al Rawaf, Azza Khalil Abdel Fattah, Fadia Yousif Abdel Megeid, Rania Mohammed Aziz Nazmy, Sarah Nasser Alarifi, Hind Sulaiman Al Sulaihm

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Islamic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersResearch Centre for the HumanitiesKing Saud University
KeywordsMedical educationContinuous educationHigher educationRevenueInvestment (military)LiteracyPublic relationsPsychologySociologyBusinessPedagogyPolitical scienceEconomic growthMedicineEconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims at highlighting the role of Continuous Education Programs at the Saudi Universities in Religious, Social, and Health Literacy; King Saud University was taken as an example. To achieve the goals of the study two questionnaires were distributed among two samples from King Saud University; (101) of students, and (9) of continuous education centers’ directors. Results showed that continuous education programs presented in religious awareness development do not contribute sufficiently in developing them. However; continuous education programs have favorable role in community’s social culturing. Also, continuous education programs contribute, at medium degree, in community’s health culturing. On the other hand; people in charge agree that the investment revenue in financing continuous education programs is minor as well as financing offered by the University. In light of the study results, the researchers recommended paying more attention to present more continuous education programs of concern as to individuals’ needs through cooperation with the research center in the University to perform survey studies targeted to define the individuals’ needs in terms of religious, social and health issues.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.360 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education StudiesSame topicEducation and Islamic StudiesFrench-language works237,207