The Purpose Model for Improving Digital Management in Universities in Guangxi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives of this research were: 1) to study the current situation of digital management in universities in Guangxi, 2) to develop the purpose model for improving digital management in universities in Guangxi, 3) to evaluate the suitability and feasibility of the purpose model for improving digital management in universities in Guangxi. The sample group of this research was 148 administrators in 20 public undergraduate universities in Guangxi. They were selected by systematic random sampling and sample random sampling. The interview group was led by administrators from 12 universities, totaling 12 people. The experts for evaluating the suitability and feasibility of the purpose model for improving digital management consisted of high-level administrators from 7 universities, totaling 7 people. The research instruments were document analysis, questionnaire, structured interview, and evaluation form. The statistics to analyze the data were percentage, average value, and standard deviation. The results found that the current situation of digital management in universities in Guangxi in five aspects was at a high level. Considering the results of this research aspects ranged from the highest to lowest level were as follows: the highest level was the digital campus security management system, followed by the digital student management system, and the digital scientific research management system was the lowest level. The purpose model for improving digital management in universities in Guangxi has five aspects, which contain 40 measures. There are 7 measures to enhance the digital management ability of Guangxi University managers, 10 measures to promote the digital teaching management system in Universities in Guangxi, 8 measures to promote the digital scientific research management system in Universities in Guangxi, 9 measures to promote the digital student management system in Universities in Guangxi, 6 measures to promote the digital campus security management system in Universities in Guangxi. The results of the evaluation of the suitability and feasibility of the purpose model for improving digital management in universities in Guangxi were at the highest level.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".