MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969524839 · doi:10.5430/ijhe.v8n5p45

Beliefs about Student Achievement Held by Teachers at Dutch Universities of Applied Sciences

2019· article· en· W2969524839 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abdel Hafid Ballafkih, Daniël van Middelkoop

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Higher Education · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStudent achievementMathematics educationPsychologyCitizenshipAcademic achievementPedagogyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Student achievement is a frequently debated issue in many European countries. In most public debates, it is assumed that all school-level stakeholders hold the same beliefs about student achievement. This paper contributes to the debate by presenting the results of research on the beliefs of teachers regarding student achievement.The results reveal four beliefs about student achievement held by teachers. The beliefs are centred on student efficiency, learning and enhancing skills, personal development, and active citizenship. The dominant belief is about the preparation for a profession in which a high-achieving student has good prospects of becoming a successful professional in a particular field. The results also show that the dominant belief held by school administrators (management), namely that student achievement is the same as student efficiency (how quickly students complete their studies), is questioned by teachers.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.358 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Higher EducationSame topicTeacher Education and Leadership StudiesFrench-language works237,207