MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Стратегически фактори в средата на училищните организации

2016· article· W7128439095 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueГодишник на Софийския университет "Св Климент Охридски" Факултет по педагогика Книга Педагогика · 2016
Typearticle
Language
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Research in Science and Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Work (physics)Curriculum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Изследването е посветено на проблема за стратегическите фактори в организационната среда на училищните организации. Направен е опит за конкретизиране на тези фактори. В студията се прави кратка характеристика на различните фактори. Библиография: България 2020. Институт за пазарна икономика, 2015. - www.ime.bg - посетен на 11.01.2016. Глоссарий современного образования. Харков, 2014. НУА. Господинов, Д. Организационният контекст и управлението на човешките ресурси в училище. - ГСУ „ Св. Климент Охридски ", Факултет по педагогика, Книга Педагогика, т. 102, 2009. Еничарова, Е. Образователна политика и законодателство. С., 2015. Закон за предучилищното и училищното образование. Захариев, Б., И. Йорданов. Оценка на включването на ромите на пазара на труда чрез общи и специфични за целевата група мерки и програми за заетост, финансирани от ЕС. Институт „Отворено общество“, 2014. - www.osf.bg - посетен на 12.01.2016. Как България може да подобри образованието си? Световна банка - България, 2014 - посетен на 12.01.2016. Национална стратегия на Република България за интегриране на ромите 2012-2020 г. Преброяване на населението 2011 година. Окончателни резултати. Национален статистически институт. - www.nsi.bg - посетен на 10.01.2016. Регионални профили - показатели за развитие 2015 г. Институт за пазарна икономика, 2015 г. - www.irae.bg - посетен на 14.01.2016. Шведовская, А., Т. Загвоздина. Социально-зкономический статус семьи и психическое развитие ребенка: зарубежньгй опит. - Психологическая наука и образовате, 2013, 1. - http://psyjournals.ru/psyedu/2013/nl/58600_full.shtmlp - посетен на 15.01.2016. Bascia, N. The School Context Model: How School Environment Shape Students Opportunities to Learn. University of Toronto, 2014. Branson, C., S. Gross. Handbook of Ethical Educational Leadership. New York, 2014. Routledge. Bulgaria Teachers. SABER Country Report, 2013. - www.worldbank.org Cletus, В., F. Lunenburg, L. Potter. Creating for High-Performing Schools. New York, 2011, Rowman & Littlefield Education. Delaney, J. Educational Policy Studies. Brush Education, 2015. Eulina, M., P. de Carvalho. Rethinking Family - School Relations. New York, 2014, Psychology Press. Glanz, J. Cultural Leadership. Corwin Press, 2006. Handbook of Resilience in Children. Springer, 2013. Handbook of Prosocial Education. 2011 Rowman & Littlefield Education OFSTED Criteria of the Strategic Analysis for School, 2011. - www.boltonlea.org.uk Rizvi, Е, B. Lingard. Globalizing Educational Policy. New York, 2010, Routledge. UNESCO Handbook of Education Policy Analysis and Programming. Vol. 2. UNESCO, 2013. Zajda, J., M. Geo-Jaja. The Politics ofEducation Reforms. Springer, 2010.

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.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.555
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0080.007
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.004
Bibliometrics0.0040.009
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.008
Open science0.0120.006
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.021

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.290 · 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