MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409856155 · doi:10.5539/hes.v15n2p356

Research on the Construction and Application of a Blended Teaching Evaluation System for Public Finance under the “New Economics and Management” Strategy: Based on the TOE Analytical Framework

2025· article· en· W4409856155 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yuan Huaping, Zhang Baobing

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher Education Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEducational Reforms and Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Graduate EducationAnhui University of Finance and EconomicsAnhui University
KeywordsHigher educationTeaching methodBusinessEngineering managementEconomicsManagement scienceMathematics educationEngineeringPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Driven by the digital education strategy, the field of higher education is undergoing accelerated transformation. As a core course in the field of finance and economics, the teaching model of public finance urgently needs innovation to meet the requirements of the "New Economics and Management" (NEM) strategy for cultivating high-quality professional talents. However, the current evaluation system for public finance teaching in higher education institutions faces issues such as formalism and oversimplification, which fails to meet the demands of the digital age. This study takes the public finance course at Anhui University of Finance and Economics as the research object and constructs a blended teaching evaluation system integrating "technology empowerment, organizational collaboration, and environmental adaptation" based on the Technology-Organization-Environment (TOE) analytical framework. The system adopts a combination of multi-agent evaluation and process-oriented evaluation to comprehensively assess teaching effectiveness from three dimensions: technology, organization, and environment. The practical results show that this evaluation system can effectively enhance students' learning outcomes and the achievement of teaching objectives, providing a scientific basis for the continuous improvement of public finance teaching quality. In addition, the study proposes optimization strategies, including technological upgrades, teacher training, and policy support, aiming to offer theoretical and practical references for the teaching reform of finance and economics disciplines under the NEM strategy.

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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.508
Threshold uncertainty score0.573

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher Education StudiesSame topicEducational Reforms and InnovationsFrench-language works237,207