Monitoring of the Development Potential of Educational Services in General Secondary Education Institutions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article considers the results of scientific research on the problem of monitoring the quality of educational services, as well as analyzes and summarizes the important parameters of such monitoring. The activities of educational institution have many components and aspects. Proposed to develop integrated indicators of the quality of educational services, which would combine many factors of educational activities and reflect the central goal of the educational process − the development of the child's personality. The author writes that comprehensive personal development is the main goal of educational activities, so such an integral criteria for the quality of educational services can be the development potential of the educational process in educational institutions. The article considers the system of students’ skills, abilities, personal and mental qualities, which provide an opportunity to successfully acquire the necessary school knowledge and skills. They are considered as indicators and manifestations of effective developmental effect of the educational process on the student's personality. They characterize the development potential of educational services. Described the following types of universal learning activities: cognitive (ability to learn, logical thinking, etc.), communicative (social competence, ability to communicate, etc.), regulatory (goal setting, planning, etc.), personal (provide value-semantic and moral-ethical orientations of students ). Criteria and levels for assessing the development potential of educational services were presented.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".