MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2973232622 · doi:10.32370/ia_2019_09_22

IMPROVING THE ART OF EDUCATION IN THE DAILY ACTIVITIES OF A WALDORF TEACHER

2019· article· en· W2973232622 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Olena Mezentseva

Bibliographic record

VenueIntellectual Archive · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Methods and Teacher Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContemplationContext (archaeology)PedagogyProfessional developmentClass (philosophy)Order (exchange)Mathematics educationSociologyPsychologyEpistemologyHistoryPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article discuss the question of the teacher's professional development in accordance to the modern education challenges.Waldorf Education is taken as an example of effective teachers' professional on-going development.Rudolf Steiner , an Austrian philosopher and thinker, a founder of the first Waldorf School (die Freie Waldorfschule) in Stuttgart (Germany) in 1919, considered education not just as a science but also as an art.He stated that the art of education could be brought to life "through observation and contemplation of the cosmos and its connection with the human being" [4].Steiner gave certain practical advices in the teachers' training, practice and feedback to provide adequate follow-up support in order to create the teachers' learning communities.The article observes the initial training of Waldorf teachers in their daily activities that include weekly teachers' conferences, child observation and class observation exercises, artistic workshops, lectures, seminars etc.The discussed problem is an essential part within the wider context of education reforms in Ukraine.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntellectual ArchiveSame topicEducational Methods and Teacher DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207