Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article proposes the concept of peopleship education, embodied by an analysis of four major Chinese educational policy documents since the 1990s. The Chinese 'people', different from 'citizens', are abstract, correct and materialistic. Such 'people' are produced by peopleship education, understood as state hegemony through public education to create Chinese individuals who leave the legitimacy of the Communist Party of China (CPC) unquestioned. Situated within a framework of state hegemony that consists of political socialization and depoliticization, China's peopleship education is underlined by two distinct features, i.e., historical representation and materialistic modernization. The former refers to a historical conditioning and translating of people's abstractness and correctness, via which the CPC claims its legitimacy in representing the people and the society. The latter refers to a subtle shift of power from the realm of party-state legitimacy to a limited field of modernization as economic productivity - a shift that produces a materialistic people whose interests are to be justified by economic answers rather than political ones. Implications are further discussed, regarding policy analysis in China and comparative citizenship studies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".