Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this project is twofold.First, it was to establish if there was a need for a Master of Education program inSchool District 59 in British Columbia.If so, then to evaluate the effectiveness of the delivery model of the program after delivery of the first course.Following establishment of a cohort with The University of Lethbridge, where students use a combination of on-site instruction and computer-assisted instruction to complete the program requirements for a Master of Education, monitoring ofthe program development began.This development of the program took place over a fifteen-month period from October 1998 to January 2000 and had three distinct stages.Firstly, a needs assessment determined that there was support for establishing a cohort amongst the professionals of School District 59.Secondly, negotiations between School District 59 and The University of Lethbridge determined the parameters of a partnership.Thirdly, an evaluation of the program was conducted following completion of the first course delivered on-site.The evaluation of the first course confirmed that the model for delivery was very effective.The program is still ongoing at the time of this project completion and so further evaluation is pending.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".