Questioning Chinese Multicultural Education: Looking through Uyghur experiences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although, in the early 1950s, the education for minorities in China commenced with relatively egalitarian principals that respected minority languages and cultures, during the Cultural Revolution all minorities were deprived of the rights to use their own languages and cultures in educational institutions. 1980s and early 1990s witnessed relatively open multiculturalism that guaranteed minorities some level of autonomy over their educational systems. However, since late 1990s and early 2000s, language and cultural rights of Chinese minorities have been increasingly infringed in all educational institutions. While emphasizing that multiculturalism in Chinese education system mostly concerns with minority cultures, and lacks critical aspect, this article, through specific illustrations of the educational experiences of Uyghur minority, contends that the current multicultural education in China is largely following the structuralist-functionalist paradigm that regards human resource development and assimilation into dominant group as the ideal way for minority groups to gain success in society. Consequently, the latest developments of Chinese multicultural education in many aspects have been similar to the early educational traditions of Western governments that aimed to assimilate the aboriginals into the dominant groups through education.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".