MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2911347881 · doi:10.5539/hes.v9n1p100

Analysis of Educational Quality, a Goal of Education for All Policy

2019· article· en· W2911347881 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rehaf Madani

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher Education Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistics Education and Methodologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeclarationGovernment (linguistics)Quality (philosophy)Economic growthInvestment (military)Public relationsProductivityEducation policyHigher educationDeveloping countryPolitical scienceEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Education is recognized as a human right since the adoption of Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 besides health and shelter. Education for All Goals was established where more than 150 governments have adopted world declaration on Education for All policy to support the universal right for education. The ultimate goal of many countries is to guarantee the optimum educational access rates for improving the quality. Similarly, quality is reflected by a range of indicators, including government spending on education, student/teacher ratios, teacher qualifications, test scores, and the length of time students spend in school. Every investment must be measured against how it can serve such aspects to ensure the ultimate quality of Education for All programs. Investing in education reinforces a society’s wealth and growth, where individuals can easily improve their own personal efficacy, productivity, and incomes. A major challenge lies in defining the ideal education indicators and circumstances among countries; especially poorly developed countries that strive to establish a quality evaluation theme. Therefore, there is need of multifaceted standpoint and reasoning framework to realize educational policy evaluations that can truly contribute to the improvement of educational situation in developing countries and around the world.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.010
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0110.008
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.394
GPT teacher head0.599
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 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

Citations254
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher Education StudiesSame topicStatistics Education and MethodologiesFrench-language works237,207