Autonomy, Social Inequality, and Support in Chinese Urban and Rural Adolescents’ Reasoning About the Chinese College Entrance Examination ( <i>Gaokao</i> )
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Gaokao, a mandatory postsecondary entrance examination for all Chinese students, is often associated with psychological stress among Chinese students in their final year of high school. This project was conducted in summer 2017 in urban Beijing and rural Xi’an, China. The purpose is to explore the perspectives of urban and rural secondary school graduates after they have completed the examination, using in-depth clinical interviews. The study draws on Self-Determination Theory and research on moral reasoning to examine several themes surrounding Chinese adolescents’ perceptions of the Gaokao, including general perceptions of the purpose of education, intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, sources of support and pressure during study for the Gaokao, and issues of fairness and social inequality. The major findings are that students from all backgrounds reported psychological conflict regarding their general views of the aims of education and the extrinsic pressure deriving from the high-stakes Gaokao examination. Inequality was seen as further exacerbated by family background, resources, and quality of teaching. Urban parents tended to provide more support, both academic and interpersonal. Rural students rated their mental health as significantly lower than urban students during their senior year of high school.
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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it