MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409636940 · doi:10.47154/sjtpk.v15i1.200

Memahami Kristologi Menurut Kolose 1:28 Untuk Membina Jemaat Melalui Model Partners in Learning

2023· article· en· W4409636940 on OpenAlexaff
Yustinus Hia

Bibliographic record

VenueSCRIPTA Jurnal Teologi dan Pelayanan Kontekstual · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicContemporary Christian Leadership and Education
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this journal is to apply the principles of fostering church members through the teaching model of partners in learning where coaches and congregations emphasize the importance of relationships to build trust between the two parties. As was done by the Lord Jesus Himself in His ministry, namely building relationships with the people He served, this partner in learning model also applies the importance of acceptance and appreciation between personal mentors and the congregation. Some of the impacts of the partners in Learning model: (1) Involvement means increasing the partnership between tutors and students, (2) Awareness. This model helps mentors and students to develop metacognitive awareness and a growing identity, (3) Improvement. Learners are more active and responsible for the learning program that is being carried out. Partners in learning change the way of 'telling students about topics they need to know' to facilitating them to get the necessary information (inquiry). Partners in learning will produce students like Paul taught in Col. 1:28 namely growing towards maturity towards Christ.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.003

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSCRIPTA Jurnal Teologi dan Pelayanan KontekstualSame topicContemporary Christian Leadership and EducationFrench-language works237,207