MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Выбор ложных движущих сил для реформы целостной системы (пер. с англ. А. Пинской)

2013· article· ru· W4214861639 on OpenAlex
Michael Fullan

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueVoprosy Obrazovaniya/ Educational Studies Moscow · 2013
Typearticle
Languageru
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCentral Asia Education and Culture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLibrary sciencePolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Michael Fullan. Choosing the wrong drivers for whole system reform // Centre for strategic education seminar series paper № 204. April 2011.СодержаниеДвижущие силы реформы целостной системы США и АвстралияФокусирование усилий на отчетности вместо построения потенциалаКачество индивидуальной работы вместо командыТехнологии вместо педагогикиФрагментарность вместо системности

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.383
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.014

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.320 · 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