Project Method Efficiency for the Teachers’ Professional Activities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relevance of the study is based on the discrepancy between the need for the project management program-methodical support and insufficient development in pedagogical practice. Aims. The aim of the study is to examine the effective development and implementation of the project method in the HEI from the standpoint of pedagogy as a new type of educational process management. Methods: questionnaire methods and pedagogical observation methods. The following questionnaires were used. E. Torrance’s “Tests of Creative Thinking” method. An “unfinished thesis” method (J. Sachs, S. Levy). Questionnaire for self-evaluation of the teacher’s knowledge and skills during transition to teaching using a new pedagogical technology by N.V. Nemova. Method for teacher’s basic competencies evaluation by L.A. Adambaeva. Statistical calculations were performed using Kendall’s T coefficient and chi-squared test. Results. The number of students with a high level of personality orientation increased only by 5.3%, and those with a high level of creative activity - by 8.7%. We can’t speak about a significant decrease in the number of students who at the end of the experiment had a low level of the aesthetic position formation. Thus, the number of students who showed developed creative thinking in project activities became only 5.3% less than at the beginning of the experiment. Conclusions. A significant increase in the general level of cognitive competence formation in the experimental group in comparison with the control group is explained by purposeful work with students, taking into account special pedagogical conditions. Perspectives. Further study can be carried out towards the development and implementation of a project method to improve the competencies acquisition, taking into account future professional activities.
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 | 0.026 | 0.073 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.028 | 0.009 |
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".