MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391154121 · doi:10.15804/tner.13.32.2.25

The Bologna Process and Teacher Training in the Czech Republic: Opinions of Academic Staff and Students about the Two-cycle System Implementation at the Faculty of Education of Charles University in Prague

2013· article· en· W4391154121 on OpenAlexaff
Stanislav Bendl, Hana Voňková, Michal Zvírotský

Bibliographic record

VenueThe New Educational Review · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligious Education and Schools
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Particle Physics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCzechBologna ProcessMedical educationPedagogyAcademic yearProcess (computing)Training (meteorology)Political scienceMathematics educationLibrary scienceHigher educationSociologyPsychologyMedicineComputer scienceGeographyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One goal of the Bologna process is to restructure European university programs from monolithic five-year programs into two cycles, bachelor’s and master’s. In this paper, we ask academic staff (n=52) and students (n=126) at the Faculty of Education of Charles University in Prague about their opinions on the implementation of the two-cycle system at their faculty. Nine out of ten academic staff and three out of ten students prefer the old five-year programs, arguing that the two-cycle system is not suitable for teacher training, subject courses are not sufficiently linked with teaching courses and that bachelor’s graduates cannot find jobs at schools. Students tend to prefer the two-cycle system, mostly because they get the bachelor’s degree. Our results can be used as empirical evidence in discussion about possible changes of teacher training programs.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.380
Threshold uncertainty score0.619

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.390 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe New Educational ReviewSame topicReligious Education and SchoolsFrench-language works237,207