MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Теоретичен анализ на възможностите на „case study“ за изследване на сложни социални явления

2020· article· W7128443680 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Мария Петкова

Bibliographic record

VenueГодишник на Софийския университет "Св Климент Охридски" Факултет по педагогика Книга Педагогика · 2020
Typearticle
Language
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychology of Development and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentification (biology)Process (computing)Work (physics)Product (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Настоящата студия представя само част от един научно-теоретичен анализ на практико-приложните възможности на метода „case study“, като разкрива холистичния му потенциал. Целта и е чрез систематизиране и анализ на същността, спецификите и методологическите предпоставки на метода „изследване на случай“ да се очертаят предимствата и ограниченията му да изследва сложни социалния явления. Теоретичният анализ е изграден чрез методите абстрахиране, анализ и синтез. На основата му се достигна до извода, че изследването на случай като метод за изследване има потенциал да бъде изведен извън рамките на частния случай и да осъществи анализ от по-висок клас, какъвто се изисква при изследването на сложно социално явления. Библиография: Бижков, Г., Краевски, В. (2005) Основи на педагогиката. София: Университетско издателство „Св. Климент Охридски“. Господинов, Б. (1998) Ефективност на обучението. Същност и отделни аспекти на осъществяване. Пловдив: СЕМА 2001. Господинов, Б. (2016) Научното педагогическо изследване. Методологически, технологични и методически аспекти. София: Университетско издателство ,,Св. Климент Охридски“. Иванов, П. (2010a) Приложна социална психология. (Том 1). Русе: Издателска къща „Ахат“. Иванов, П. (20106) Приложна социална психология. (3 изд., Том 2). Русе: Изд. къща „Ахат“. Иванов, C., M. Иванов (2006) Социална психология. Шумен: Университетско издателство „Епископ Константин Преславски“. Михайлов, C. (1997) Енциклопедичен речник по социология (Том Второ издание). София: „М-8-М“ Михаил Мирчев. Съйкова, C., A. Атанасов, E. Ченгелова (2014) Социалните емпирични изследвания. София: Академично издателство „Проф. Марин Дринов“. Фотев, Г. (2002) История на социологията (Том 1). София: изд. къща Труд. Coe, R., Waring, M., Hedges, L. V., & Arthur, J. (2017) Research method & methodologies in education. London: SAGE. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Marrison, K. (2011) Research methods in education (7 ed.). New York, USA: Routledge. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing Among The Five Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Crowe, S., Cresswell, K., Robertson, A., Huby, G., Avery , A., & Sheikh, A. (2011, June). The Case Study Approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 2-9. Flyvbjerg, B. (April 2006 r.). Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219-245. doi:10.1177/1077800405284363 Gagnon, Y.-C. (2010) Case study as a research method. A practical handbook. Quebec : Presses de l'Universite du Quabec . Gerring , J. (2017) Case study reseasrch. Principles and practices (2nd ed.). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambrdge University Press. Golby, M. (1994) Case Study as Educational Research, Educational Research Monograph Series (5th ed.). Exeter: University of Exeter. Hancock, D. R., & Algozzine, B. (2017). Doing case study research. NY: Teachers College Press. Miles, Matthew B.; Huberman, Michael; Saldana, Johnny;. (2014). Qualitative Data Analysis (3th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE . Scholz, R. W, Blinder, C. R. (2011) Environmental Literacy in Science and Society: From Knowledge to Decisions. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press Silverman, D. (2014). Interpreting qualitative data (5th ed.). London: SAGE. Thomas, D., & Bierman, K. (Spring 2006 r.). The impact of classroom aggression on the development of aggressive behavior problems in children. Dev Psychopathol, 18(2), 471-487. doi:10.1017/S0954579406060251 Thomas, G. (2011). The case: generalisation, theory and phronesis in case study. Oxford Review o f Education , 37(1), 21-35. 190 Verschuren, P. (2003 April r.). Case study as a research strategy: Some ambiguities and opportunities. International Journal o f Social Research Methodology, 6(2), 121-139. doi: 10.1080/13645570110106154 Yin, R. K. (2002). Case Study Research Design and Methods (3th изд., Том 5). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: design and methods (4th ed., Vol. 5). Los Angeles: SAGE.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.005

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 head0.160
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.256 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueГодишник на Софийския университет "Св Климент Охридски" Факултет по педагогика Книга ПедагогикаSame topicPsychology of Development and EducationFrench-language works237,207