Research on Quantitative Evaluation System of Educational Effect of Three Lines and Four Passes of Teaching Workshop for Geology Majors Based on Cluster Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes the teaching problems and methods that need to be solved for the innovation of education mode from the needs of teaching conditions, teacher strength, school-enterprise cooperation, etc., and puts forward the “three lines and four passes” education mode based on situational teaching workshop for geology majors. The evaluation index system is constructed for the quality of “three lines and four passes” education model, and various colleges and universities in a certain province are selected for empirical analysis to analyze the quality of education for students in the province from three aspects. In order to determine the contribution size of the 10 secondary indicators in the education quality evaluation index system, the method of determining the weights of the indicators by using principal component analysis was used to calculate the education quality indexes of the public higher vocational colleges and universities and private higher vocational colleges and universities. The K-means cluster analysis method was performed on the basis of the hierarchical cluster analysis method, and seven tiers were divided. The analysis results show that professional education, facilities and equipment, teacher-student cooperation, group competitions, practical exercises, talent cultivation and vocational training have a greater weight of 5% in the evaluation index system of public and private institutions. In conclusion, it is concluded that the “three lines and four passes” education model based on master craftsmen workshop proposed in this paper has a better teaching effect on the quality of education.
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 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 | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".