The Book Loving Atmosphere from the Campus — from Class Study Group to Parent Study Group
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to build a book loving campus, National Feng Yuan Senior High School has organized many reading programs. In these programs, we divide teachers, students and their parents into several study groups. After numerous meetings, it is found that with well-planned guidance, these reading programs help them not only actively to participate in group discussion and exchange ideas but also to broaden their horizons and develop multiculturalism. This paper intends to share our experience and strategies in the implementation of the whole reading programs. The first section is a detailed introduction to the procedures of the reading programs, including how to organize study groups, train the study group leaders, help students make reports and performances, hold contests and publish students' results. In the second section, the actual operation of parent study group is described. At the end, we examine all the achievements from these activities, and make some recommendations. In addition, we are firmly convinced that schools, families, and the society are an undivided union. If we can incorporate community resources into reading programs, we can surely create a well-structured and comfortable reading environment. We provide this experience of building a book loving campus to the public, and sincerely hope to eliminate the stereotyped image of reading and make vivid and interesting reading experiences blended into daily lives that everyone can enjoy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".