MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384203671 · doi:10.1515/9780773570689-fm

Front Matter

2003· paratext· en· W4384203671 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMcGill-Queen's University Press eBooks · 2003
Typeparatext
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Education and Learning Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFront (military)PhysicsMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Integrating School and Workplace Learning in Canada Principles and Practices of Alternation Education and TrainingRapid economic change has raised public concern that the educational system is not preparing its graduates for work in the new economy.Many employers complain that the knowledge and skills of post-secondary graduates are inadequate or irrelevant to the needs of the workplace.Vocational and workplace training programs are, however, criticized as being too narrowly focused.Approaches to learning that combine experiential and cognitive learning represent a promising response to the need to acquire relevant skills and develop the intellectual capabilities that allow individuals to address and solve complex problems encountered in the workplace.Such hybrid forms of learning are termed "alternation."They not only involve a curricular balance between the theoretical and the practical but also use two distinct venues for learning -the classroom and the workplace.Regular periods of classroom learning are complemented by workplace learning in apprenticeships, co-op education, or work-experience programs.Various facets of alternation are discussed in this volume, including its basis in cognitive and social learning, its implementation in a variety of settings, its role in smoothing the school-work transition process, and its potential to contribute to the knowledge and skills needed by the workforce.The authors bring a wide range of disciplinary perspectives to bear in their analyses of the principles and practices of alternation in Canada, providing historical, theoretical, and practical insights.Their analyses contribute to and extend the current debate and discussion surrounding necessary changes in Canada's educational and training policies.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0310.014

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 head0.307
Teacher spread0.270 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMcGill-Queen's University Press eBooksSame topicInnovative Education and Learning PracticesFrench-language works237,207