确定英国研究生教学教育的研究议程:机器学习的经验教训促进了系统的范围审查

IF 2.3 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Oxford Review of Education Pub Date : 2023-05-30 DOI:10.1080/03054985.2023.2203376
Gale Macleod, Marshall Dozier, Rosa Marvell, Gerri Matthews-Smith, Malcolm R. Macleod, Jing Liao
{"title":"确定英国研究生教学教育的研究议程:机器学习的经验教训促进了系统的范围审查","authors":"Gale Macleod, Marshall Dozier, Rosa Marvell, Gerri Matthews-Smith, Malcolm R. Macleod, Jing Liao","doi":"10.1080/03054985.2023.2203376","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This research aimed to describe and evaluate research on the Postgraduate Taught (PGT) sector in the UK from January 2008 to October 2019. The focus on PGT allowed a detailed analysis of an often overlooked part of the HE sector. Methodologically, the research is original in its use of an innovative machine learning approach to a systematic scoping review. The review scrutinised subject areas, topics studied and methodological approaches taken. Initial searches found 9,814 potentially relevant studies which were reduced to 693 for analysis. The machine learning approach was successful in reducing time without compromising accuracy. We conclude that this methodological approach is appropriate for similar reviews within education. Findings show a dominance of research into professional education programmes; a majority of research with PGT as the context rather than focus; a small number of comparative and large-scale studies; and substantial research categorised as ‘scholarship of teaching’. While further research is required to ascertain if the findings are transferable to other national contexts, this study provides a reproducible methodology and identifies areas for future research to examine.","PeriodicalId":47910,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Review of Education","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Identifying a research agenda for postgraduate taught education in the UK: lessons from a machine learning facilitated systematic scoping review\",\"authors\":\"Gale Macleod, Marshall Dozier, Rosa Marvell, Gerri Matthews-Smith, Malcolm R. Macleod, Jing Liao\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/03054985.2023.2203376\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This research aimed to describe and evaluate research on the Postgraduate Taught (PGT) sector in the UK from January 2008 to October 2019. The focus on PGT allowed a detailed analysis of an often overlooked part of the HE sector. Methodologically, the research is original in its use of an innovative machine learning approach to a systematic scoping review. The review scrutinised subject areas, topics studied and methodological approaches taken. Initial searches found 9,814 potentially relevant studies which were reduced to 693 for analysis. The machine learning approach was successful in reducing time without compromising accuracy. We conclude that this methodological approach is appropriate for similar reviews within education. Findings show a dominance of research into professional education programmes; a majority of research with PGT as the context rather than focus; a small number of comparative and large-scale studies; and substantial research categorised as ‘scholarship of teaching’. While further research is required to ascertain if the findings are transferable to other national contexts, this study provides a reproducible methodology and identifies areas for future research to examine.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47910,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Oxford Review of Education\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Oxford Review of Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2023.2203376\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oxford Review of Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2023.2203376","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究旨在描述和评估2008年1月至2019年10月英国研究生授课(PGT)部门的研究。对PGT的关注使我们能够对高等教育领域中经常被忽视的部分进行详细分析。在方法上,该研究的独创性在于使用创新的机器学习方法进行系统的范围审查。审查审查了学科领域、研究课题和采用的方法方法。最初的搜索发现了9814项可能相关的研究,然后减少到693项进行分析。机器学习方法在不影响准确性的情况下成功地减少了时间。我们的结论是,这种方法方法适用于教育领域的类似审查。调查结果显示,对专业教育课程的研究占主导地位;大多数以PGT为背景而不是重点的研究;少量的比较和大规模的研究;以及被归类为“教学学术”的大量研究。虽然需要进一步研究以确定调查结果是否适用于其他国家情况,但这项研究提供了一种可重复的方法,并确定了今后研究的领域。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Identifying a research agenda for postgraduate taught education in the UK: lessons from a machine learning facilitated systematic scoping review
This research aimed to describe and evaluate research on the Postgraduate Taught (PGT) sector in the UK from January 2008 to October 2019. The focus on PGT allowed a detailed analysis of an often overlooked part of the HE sector. Methodologically, the research is original in its use of an innovative machine learning approach to a systematic scoping review. The review scrutinised subject areas, topics studied and methodological approaches taken. Initial searches found 9,814 potentially relevant studies which were reduced to 693 for analysis. The machine learning approach was successful in reducing time without compromising accuracy. We conclude that this methodological approach is appropriate for similar reviews within education. Findings show a dominance of research into professional education programmes; a majority of research with PGT as the context rather than focus; a small number of comparative and large-scale studies; and substantial research categorised as ‘scholarship of teaching’. While further research is required to ascertain if the findings are transferable to other national contexts, this study provides a reproducible methodology and identifies areas for future research to examine.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Oxford Review of Education
Oxford Review of Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: The Oxford Review of Education is a well established journal with an extensive international readership. It is committed to deploying the resources of a wide range of academic disciplines in the service of educational scholarship, and the Editors welcome articles reporting significant new research as well as contributions of a more analytic or reflective nature. The membership of the editorial board reflects these emphases, which have remained characteristic of the Review since its foundation. The Review seeks to preserve the highest standards of professional scholarship in education, while also seeking to publish articles which will be of interest and utility to a wider public, including policy makers.
期刊最新文献
Colour-evasive racial ideologies underpinning the hidden curriculum of a majority-minority occupational therapy school in London, England: an analysis of minoritised undergraduate students’ experiences Environment in the views of preschool children: an investigation of children’s drawings and narratives in Turkey Understanding the salary gap between academic faculty and top administrators: a New Public Management perspective Theory-informed beliefs in early childhood education: contradictions in child development theories and models of play The pronunciation of students’ names in higher education: identity work by academics and professional services staff
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1