Philosophical-Psychological, Pedagogical-Managerial Aspects of "Qualitative" Formation of Future Specialists of All Levels of Training and Specialties in the Conditions of Technical University
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study is devoted to such topical issues in the theory and methodology of education and pedagogy of higher education as the training of future leaders, namely the formation and development of leadership qualities of students in technical universities. On the topic of the study, the authors analyzed the literature of leading scientists in the field of philosophy, psychology and pedagogy, identified features of the formation of leadership in the student environment. The study reveals the seven most important criteria that form the core of the personality of the future specialist leader. The use of these seven criteria of personality development of the future specialist in technical universities requires a combination and adaptation of traditional approaches to education and the latest pedagogical technologies. This is aimed not just at introducing certain forms and methods of work into the educational process, but at creating a specially organized professional environment in which future professionals have opportunities for professional and personal growth through conscious change and transformation of both the environment and themselves. In the process of personal change, the student's historical "I" is as close as possible to his logical "I" and is held by the latter with the help of Onto In-Se. This is how the future specialist acquires leadership qualities, first of all: cognitive, communicative, organizational, moral and volitional and reflexive skills. It is established that through the development of conceptual and creative thinking of the student it is possible to influence the formation of his critical "I" as a necessary attribute of leadership: the ability to listen and hear, understand and act.
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 | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".