MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1522677197

The Development of Preschool Education Achievements, Problems and Policy Recommendations of Tibet

2015· article· en· W1522677197 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Cai Hong-mei, Shanze Li, Zhihui Zhu, Chen Cheng, F Liang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian social science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChina's Ethnic Minorities and Relations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsYearbookGovernment (linguistics)Ethnic groupEconomic growthPreschool educationNational educationPolitical scienceQuality (philosophy)Rural areaMathematics educationSociologyPedagogyPsychologyEconomicsLibrary scienceComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper shows the development of preschool education in Tibet through analyzing the statistical data from Statistical Yearbook of National Education, Statistical Yearbook of National Education Funding and Statistical Yearbook of Tibet and field investigations. It is found that the preschool education in Tibet has developed rapidly for the support of government, and achieved the following development effectiveness: education resources have increased; preschool education funding increased rapidly; the development tends to be balanced between urban and rural areas; bilingual education developed rapidly, and more attention is paid to education equality. However, there are still many problems to be solved in the future. The study has indicated that the quality of preschool education in ethnic areas is low, the local government does not play an active role in developing preschool education and the preschool education is unsuitable for local features. Therefore, more attention should be paid to the preschool education in ethnic areas as well as to the quality of the quantity and the theory researches. The government should also develop the bilingual education in Tibetan scientifically.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.221
Threshold uncertainty score0.439

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian social scienceSame topicChina's Ethnic Minorities and RelationsFrench-language works237,207