MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945385916 · doi:10.3968/11045

Application of the Mixed Teaching Innovation in the English for Science and Technology Teaching

2019· article· en· W2945385916 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

VenueHigher education of social science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHigher Education and Teaching Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationQuality (philosophy)Teaching and learning centerTeaching methodCollege EnglishCourse (navigation)Computer sciencePsychologyEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To improve the professional quality of students and train the ability of the students’ innovation research, English for science and technology (EST) is established as a course. According to the characteristics of the applied physics majors, the course training requirements, and the traditional teaching reform of our university, it is innovation to the teaching modes, contents and methods of EST (such as physics in English). The mixed teaching mode for the first time is applied in the student’s classroom. The method made the students to take part in acquired knowledge and achieved a very outstanding teaching result. EST which is the teaching reform and an important professional course can be used for the students to read the professional English literature and professional writing in the future. The mixed teaching innovation in EST has been popular with the students of applied physics.

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)0.008
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.878
Threshold uncertainty score0.512

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.331 · 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