MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3111685587 · doi:10.5430/ijhe.v9n6p318

Development of Faculty of Education of Northeastern University through Professional Learning Community Process

2020· article· en· W3111685587 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Pha Agsonsua, Vanich Prasertphorn

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Higher Education · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Learning Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical educationCommissionWork (physics)Higher educationProcess (computing)Participatory action researchProfessional developmentSample (material)PedagogyPsychologySociologyPolitical scienceEngineeringMedicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objectives of this research were 1) to study the present and the desirable condition of the Faculty of Education of Northeastern University, 2) to develop the faculty through PLC process, and 3) to assess the results. The study used PAR (Participatory Action Research) with the sample of selected groups of 6 administrators, 27 instructors, and 378 students with a total of 411 persons altogether. The research results were as follows: Regarding the present condition, the faculty has been traditionally embedded in family culture with the faculty vision of “Being a Professional Learning Community”, but, still, seriously underperformed in research work and English proficiency; therefore, the desirable condition was to have research work and English competency meet the national higher education standards that ultimately lead to being professionals. As for the results of the development of the faculty through PLC process and PAR, the research works of all staffs and students were nationally acceptable and published in the journals of TCI group 1 and 2 and looking forward to and now making good progress to international level. Over 85% of staffs and students passed the Common European Framework of Reference for Language test required by Thai Higher Education Commission. The development will be on-going and moving toward international level. In sum, the development of research work and English competency of the staffs and students in the Faculty of Education of Northeastern University through PLC process and PAR was academically and professionally effective. The study is rewarding.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.504
Threshold uncertainty score0.976

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.362 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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 venueInternational Journal of Higher EducationSame topicHigher Education Learning PracticesFrench-language works237,207