Editorial. Building learning capacity for life. Supporting life-long learning journeys through the stimulation of reflexivity in learners: five complementary perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The articles in this special issue of Reflecting Education: Building Learning Capacity for Life emanated from the eighteenth international Education, Learning, Styles, Individual differences Network (ELSIN) conference held in Billund, Denmark in 2013. ELSIN is the only multidisciplinary international research organisation specifically promoting the importance of work on styles and other individual learning differences within educational and workplace contexts. The five articles comprising this special issue are representative of the broad focus of ELSIN in their coverage of a range of contexts. Participants of the present studies do not only originate from institutes in different countries (Austria, Belgium, Canada, Germany, and Ireland), but also represent diverse education levels (school students; under-postgraduates in higher education), and a variety of disciplines (e.g., accountancy; business and economics; management; multimedia and communications).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.017 | 0.023 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.009 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".