MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Pedagogical Conditions for Reflexive Culture Improvement of Future Teachers

2020· article· en· W3092120137 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Belegova Aliya, Meiramkul Bulakbayeva, E. Barangulov, A. Kenjan, S. Koshimbetova, Gulmira Tussupbekova

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intellectual Disability - Diagnosis and Treatment · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Methods and Teacher Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReflexivitySociologyPedagogyMathematics educationPsychologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Changes in the socio-political and economic guidelines of modern society have led to the advancement of new requirements for a university graduate to his preparedness level. A market economy with the fierce competition requires specialists who are sensitive to creative work, highly professional, mobile, capable of finding and implementing new, effective forms of organizing their activities. The research problem is to search for pedagogical conditions that ensure the formation of professional-pedagogical reflection in future teachers in the process of studying at a university. The purpose of the research is to identify the level of developed skills in reflexive culture and experimentally prove the pedagogical conditions for the formation of professional-pedagogical reflection of the students of the educational faculties and enhance future teacher reflexive culture, especially of the teacher of physical training. Drawing on educational practices at the Abai Kazakh National Pedagogical University (KAZNPU) further, this paper presents the results of the future teacher reflexive culture (RC) enhancement process. It presents various content-based approach models-including those that have been developed at the KAZNPU and, examines the decision-making process of future teacher reflexive culture enhancement for a particular educational setting. This research comes to the conclusion that during the development of future teachers’ reflexive culture, it is necessary to use the set of methodological tools supporting the educational process.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.156
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.246 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Intellectual Disability - Diagnosis and TreatmentSame topicEducational Methods and Teacher DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207