MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410318820 · doi:10.23977/aetp.2025.090305

Research on "Ideological and Political Education (IPE) in the Curriculum" Reform Practice—The Course: "Digital Marketing of Financial Products" as an Case Study

2025· article· en· W4410318820 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Educational Technology and Psychology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEducational Reforms and Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumCourse (navigation)IdeologyPoliticsPolitical scienceMarketingSociologyPublic relationsBusinessPedagogyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article focuses on the "Ideological and Political Education in the Curriculum"(IPE) reform practice of the course "Digital Marketing of Financial Products" and elaborates in detail how to deeply integrate IPE elements into the whole course teaching. Through the implementation of the overall course design plan, the paper explores the IPE - oriented education approach of "Course - Workplace Requirement - Qualification Certificate - IPE Elements" integration and realizes the organic unity of knowledge transmission and value guidance. The research adopts a variety of teaching methods and means, such as case, Q&A, and OBE approaches, and combines information resources to create a learning environment for students where they can "Acquire Knowledge and IPE Anytime and Anywhere". The article can have a positive impact on the professional training of teachers and students, scientific research, technical exchanges, and social services, which provides valuable experiences and examples for the IPE reform practices around the country.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.008
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.438 · 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 designQualitative
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 venueAdvances in Educational Technology and PsychologySame topicEducational Reforms and InnovationsFrench-language works237,207