Integration of curriculum for English-language educational program (ELEP) at maritime educational and training institutions (METIs)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current opinion article represents a set of recommendations and pieces of advice related to the development and integration of the curriculum of an English-language educational program (ELEP) at maritime education and training institutions (METIs). The title of the article implies integration of the curriculum of the educational program that would entirely be taught in the English language. In my opinion, such an educational program and its alumni would help METI meet the demands of the modern international maritime labour market. The paper could be interesting and useful for higher education institutions that are oriented on the complete transition of the educational process to an English-language educational program that would be delivered only in the English language. Nowadays there are a lot of educational institutions in the world where educational processes are mainly conducted in native language, and the recommendations given in the present opinion article could be applied by these institutions for the development of the curriculum of ELEP. Consideration of curriculum design is the main topic of the present paper that comprises the most significant issues and details of the topic.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it