MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072621791 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2013.04.016

A social work study on major causes of educational failure

2013· article· en· W2072621791 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zohreh Latifi, Amir Hossein, Sadeghi Hasnijeh, Reyhaneh Shojaee Jashvaghani, Seyyed Hadi Ansar Alhoseini

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealth and Well-being Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork (physics)Computer sciencePsychologyOperations managementEconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Education is one of the most important parts of every one’s life, higher education helps people get better job offers and build their future, more successfully. Any failure in educational programs could possibly hurt society as well as country’s economy. Therefore, we need to find the major causes of educational failure and setup appropriate plans to reduce the undesirable consequences. In this study, we perform a comprehensive study on previous studies on finding major causes of educational failure in different provinces of Iran and try to focus on major factors influencing this problem. The results of our survey have concluded that there are three common factors including little interest in learning, working along with education and living status. The implementation of some statistical tests has revealed that these factors have some moderate impacts on educational failure.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicHealth and Well-being StudiesFrench-language works237,207