Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ontario is committed to helping every child and student achieve success and well-being.The primary goal of the province's education system is to enable students to develop the knowledge, skills, and characteristics that will lead them to become personally successful, economically productive, and actively engaged citizens.Researchers acknowledge that the need to engage in problem solving and critical and creative thinking has "always been at the core of learning and innovation" (Trilling & Fadel, 2009, p. 50).What's new in the 21st century is the call for education systems to emphasize and develop these competencies in explicit and intentional ways through deliberate changes in curriculum design and pedagogical practice.The goal of these changes is to prepare students to solve messy, complex problems -including problems we don't yet know about -associated with living in a competitive, globally connected, and technologically intensive world.This document will provide a focus for discussions among ministry and external education, policy, and research experts about how best to shape provincial policy to help students develop the 21st century competencies they need to succeed.These discussions will build on the consultations to renew Ontario's vision for education that took place in the autumn of 2013.Key findings from in-depth literature reviews on 21st century competencies, completed by the Ministry of Education in 2014, are summarized in this foundation document.The full in-depth reviews will be made available in the near future.The document comprises the following five sections:• How do other education jurisdictions integrate 21st century competencies into learning?What is the role of curriculum and other policies and programs in supporting the process?• What pedagogical and assessment approaches are necessary to support teaching and learning of the competencies?How can competencies be assessed, particularly non-cognitive competencies?What alignments can be made between 21st century competencies and the existing learning skills and work habits?• How can we best prepare educators, leaders, parents, and partners in education for the transformations that may be needed to bring a focus on the competencies into instruction and learning?
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.028 | 0.003 |
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".