MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6908580414 · doi:10.2760/243454

Teacher Costs

2015· other· en· W6908580414 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJoint Research Centre (European Commission) · 2015
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSalaryData collectionWork (physics)Class (philosophy)European union

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this technical brief is to assess current methodologies for the collection and calculation of teacher costs in European Union (EU) Member States in view of improving data series and indicators related to teacher salaries and teacher costs. To this end, CRELL compares the Eurydice collection on teacher salaries with the similar Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) data collection and calculates teacher costs based on the methodology established by Statistics Canada as explained in Indicator B7 in Education at a Glance (OECD, 2014). This indicator allows for analysing the different factors that influence teacher costs: teacher salaries, teaching time, instruction hours and student/teacher ratios, as well as class size. The analyses will provide specific information on the contribution of the different factors used to derive the Salary Cost of Teachers per Student (CCS) and how they might depend on the way data for the different factors are collected. On the basis of assessing the different forms of data collection with the same methodology, suggestions for development work that could be undertaken to align the Eurydice and OECD data collections are offered.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.299

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0890.018

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 head0.134
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJoint Research Centre (European Commission)French-language works237,207