MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2909726946 · doi:10.14943/b.edu.133.91

イギリスにおけるキャメロン連立政権の教育改革 : アカデミーとスタジオ・スクールを中心に

2018· article· ja· W2909726946 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
敏郎 横井, 理恵 横関, 洋一 姉崎

Bibliographic record

VenueHokkaido University Collection of Scholarly and Academic Papers (Hokkaido University) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageja
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Systems and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper studied on the education reform of Cameron conservative-liberal democrat coalition government after 2010 in England, focusing on Academy and Studio School. Firstly we arranged main issues of these policies, and secondary we analyzed some cases. We visited two areas of England: Halifax of West Yorkshire and Fulham of London to do research some cases of the conversion from maintained schools to Academies, the establishment of a further education college as Free Schools and a Studio School which is a new-type school to connect key stage 4 with key stage 5. They introduced Academies and Free Schools to resolve some local education challenges. But the number of students who entered those schools were not enough. So they were suffering from financial difficulties and lack of teachers. The results of Ofsted inspections were ‘inadeqate’and the Academy Trust of Halifax was dissolved. We found the school management was so unstable and the educational conditions of the schools were poor in these cases. The education policies of the government did not bring the successful result as expected. But the cases of our research were few and the aspects of schools we analyzed were limited. It is necessary to see more cases and analyze various aspects.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.171

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.201 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHokkaido University Collection of Scholarly and Academic Papers (Hokkaido University)Same topicEducational Systems and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207