MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205239187 · doi:10.5539/jel.v11n2p22

Creating Autonomy in the Advance of Teacher and Moral Educator Development

2022· article· en· W4205239187 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Paul A. Wagner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Critical Thinking Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvictionMoral developmentAutonomyInstinctHonestySociologyLegitimationMoral disengagementMoral characterPsychologyMoralitySocial psychologyEnvironmental ethicsPublic relationsLawPolitical sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The demand for character development in many of the Western World’s public schools is increasing. Yet there are substantive steps being taken beyond manipulating student behavior in rigidly constructed contexts. Unfortunately manipulating behavior only develops self-interest as the measure of all good and might makes right the legitimation of authority. Yet as any anthropologist can explain it is role-modeling family and village elders that decides which of two instincts will dominate human development: self-interest or cooperation (Tomasello, 2019). As Aristotle famously observed, it makes no small difference what habits humans develop rather, it makes all the difference. But to be truly conducive to moral development those habits must reflect autonomous conviction to develop organizational well-being over the pandemonium self-interest leads towards. The Moral Self-assessment Protocol discussed herein creates the conditions for teacher and other leaders to track their own moral development to role model for those growing into organization membership, in schools, cities, states, countries and businesses.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.123

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.020
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0010.014
Research integrity0.0020.006
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.321 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education and LearningSame topicEducation and Critical Thinking DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207