MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2627008987 · doi:10.5206/cie-eci.v46i1.9311

Looking Beyond the Household: The Importance of School Factors in Understanding Elementary Grade Retention in Rural Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan

2017· article· en· W2627008987 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bushra Rahim

Bibliographic record

VenueComparative and International Education · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPoverty, Education, and Child Welfare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKhyber pakhtunkhwaRetention rateMathematics educationPsychologyPrimary educationReading (process)Grade retentionAcademic achievementDemographySocioeconomicsSociologyPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper contributes to the limited literature on the educational outcomes of children in rural Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP), Pakistan. It explores the impact of school-level factors such as physical resources, teachers and school characteristics on retention to the last grade of primary in the KP province for the time period 2007-12. Two sources of data were used to measure the retention rates. One of which is an official compilation of institutional data on education known as Education Management Information System (EMIS). The second data source, Annual Status of Education Reports (ASER), is a household data set with a rich set of household covariates, teachers’ characteristics and student performance data on reading and mathematics. The results from regression analyses indicate that children are more likely to complete primary education cycle when they receive instructions in local language and when the pupil-teacher ratio is below a certain threshold. Results also reveal that a continuous increase in school size beyond a certain threshold (> 400 enrollment) is related to a decrease in retention rate. Further, mixed schools (all-boys’ schools having girls enrolled in them) were found to have better retention rates than boys’ schools.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.273 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComparative and International EducationSame topicPoverty, Education, and Child WelfareFrench-language works237,207