MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W332442013

Underachieving in America: Researchers Document International Gaps, a Journalist Seeks the Cause

2014· article· en· W332442013 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nathan Glazer

Notice bibliographique

RevueEducation next · 2014
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueEducation Systems and Policy
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésProsperityPolitical scienceGlobeState (computer science)Achievement testEconomic growthStandardized testMathematics educationPsychologyLawEconomics
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Endangering Prosperity, with three distinguished authors and an eminent introducer, is devoted to one major point: United States is truly falling behind not only East Asian countries that for some time have scored best in international comparisons of educational achievement, but also a good part of developed world, including its neighbor, Canada. The book eschews difficult effort of determining just why United States, undoubtedly a leader in educational attainment and possibly educational achievement 40 or 50 years ago, now trails other nations in both. Nor does it discuss what specific measures might enable us to catch up. Rather, through international comparative analysis, volume demonstrates that educational achievement, particularly in mathematics and science, is closely related to and probably a prime mover in economic advancement, leading to conclusion that if we do not improve our educational achievement, our economic predominance is also threatened. The book's distinctive contribution to discussion of comparative educational achievement is its ability to slot various states of United States into charts of international achievement by linking statistically scoring system of National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), which measures achievement by individual state, to that of Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), which tracks achievement around globe. And so we discover that Massachusetts, faring best among American states, stands far up scale, between Switzerland and Japan (but still behind Shanghai, Singapore, Hong Kong, Korea, Finland, and Taiwan); that northeastern and upper midwestern states score at top in United States; and that United States as a whole is way back in rankings, between Portugal and Ireland. Endangering Prosperity is meticulous in considering alternative explanations of differences in economic development. Although volume does not attempt to analyze causes of our relative decline or how it might be overcome, it shows a preference for some explanations and solutions: book asserts, for example, that the school work force--teachers, principals, superintendents, other administrators, and ancillary personnel--too often favor only those changes to status quo that enhance their income and lighten their workload. Simple solutions proposed by vested interests, such as higher expenditures, smaller classes ... added support and administrative personnel will not do. Structural reform is needed: authors are not specific, but their approval of legislative actions to alter teachers' evaluations, teachers' tenure, teachers' layoff rules, bargaining issues, and more, in a range of states, Wisconsin, Indiana, Florida, Oklahoma, Ohio, Colorado gives a strong hint as to what they favor. [ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] [ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] Does experience of countries that have gone far beyond us in educational achievement support this preference? In The Smartest Kids in World, we have a fascinating book to help us ponder just what has driven educational achievement in countries of East Asia and, surprisingly, Finland, which stands at top in achievement in Europe. It was intriguing idea of Amanda Ripley, an investigative journalist, to track experiences of three American highschool students who, dissatisfied with offerings in their home schools, decided to go abroad for a year and attend school in two countries that surpass us in educational achievement--Korea and Finland--and in Poland, which has shown remarkably rapid improvement in PISA tests. Three more diverse education systems and environments could hardly be imagined, and chances of their teaching same lesson are unlikely. Kim, a teenager in Sallisaw, Oklahoma, high school, tried to fit in as a cheerleader and marching band flutist, failing at both, and by way of unexpected high test scores took advantage of opportunity to go abroad for a year through AFS. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,009
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,025
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,047

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0090,023
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0040,010
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0140,013
Communication savante0,0250,030
Science ouverte0,0020,010
Intégrité de la recherche0,0080,013
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0100,002

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,100
Tête enseignante GPT0,452
Écart entre enseignants0,351 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2014
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueEducation nextMême sujetEducation Systems and PolicyTravaux en français237 207