MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213202233 · doi:10.20474/jahss-3.1.5

Smart school: A comparative research between two Islamic countries, Malaysia and Iran

2017· article· en· W4213202233 on OpenAlexaff
Sirous Tabrizi, Mohammad Kabirnejat

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advances in Humanities and Social Sciences · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIoT-based Smart Home Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIslamPolitical scienceGeographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, Smart Schools in Malaysia and Iran will be examined and compared to understand what opportunities and barriers still exist for improving the value and access of these schools. A smart school is a learning institution that uses non-traditional means of instruction, teaching, and learning where school management is focused on helping students cope with and leverage changes brought about by, the information age. The smart school program will be examined for both the state-sponsored public sector (state schools) and privately funded sector (private schools). Globalization requires a more practical education system in which outputs can work in complicated situations with modern instruments. Many developing countries prefer to establish an education system with Smart Schools to achieve education quality closer to developed countries. Successful smart schools' requirements are different from traditional schools in curriculum, pedagogy, assessment, teaching-learning material, management, visions, and stakeholder engagement. Malaysia successfully established this system from early 1996, and Iran has tried to also establish a smart school system since 2002.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.140
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advances in Humanities and Social SciencesSame topicIoT-based Smart Home SystemsFrench-language works237,207