MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980063786 · doi:10.5539/hes.v9n4p120

On Academic Identification of College English Teacher in Terms of Discipline in Chinese Higher Education

2019· article· en· W2980063786 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zhen Zeng

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher Education Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHigher educationDisciplineAccreditationCollege EnglishPedagogyPremiseDutyMedical educationFaculty developmentSociologyProfessional developmentPsychologyMathematics educationPolitical scienceMedicineSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper looked into faculty of Chinese College English (CE)(or CE faculty on the paper) , a great proportion of teachers teaching English for all non-English majors in higher education institutions, through analysis of CE faculty recruitment process, symbiosis of researching and teaching in their performances, as well as their restrained professional development in China higher education. It’s demonstrated that disciplinary identity on campus is the premise of being successfully fulfillment of the function of teaching and learning in higher education; CE faculty are supposed to effectively perform their duty in line with their professionals defined and developed by the discipline they are trained by. It’s discussed that for securing and protecting the efficiency and academic status of CE and CE faculty, there should be a accrediting process for CE the course accreditation and for CE faculty with academically educational program awarding degree, which is guaranteed for CE being recognized a important and legalized academic activity serving Chinese higher education as its very first design.

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)0.007
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher Education StudiesSame topicSecond Language Learning and TeachingFrench-language works237,207