MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005025883 · doi:10.5539/ies.v3n1p66

Market Forces in Higher Education---Chinese and British Experience between Mid-1980s and Mid-1990s

2010· article· en· W2005025883 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xiaonan Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Governance and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsManagerialismIdeologyChinaGovernment (linguistics)State (computer science)Higher educationNeoliberalism (international relations)Political sciencePublic administrationSociologyPolitical economyEconomic growthEconomicsPoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper tries to examine how higher education in China and Britain has been affected by market forces between the mid-1980s and the mid-1990s, from three major issues. Comparing the experiences of both places, the paper argues that unlike the case of British counterpart, where marketisation of education has shifted to a corporate management approach, the Chinese experience can be argued as being the government’s attempt to use market forces and new initiatives from the non-state sectors, rather then an ideological shift to managerialism and its practices.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.338
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.372 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education StudiesSame topicHigher Education Governance and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207