Child-Friendly School Environment: A Case of Community Schools of Pokhara
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study is carried out to investigate the status of child-friendly school environment, and identify school’s policy towards it. It was delimited to Pokhara Metropolitan of Kaski District. To accomplish the objectives, the explanatory sequential research design was used. The survey technique was used for quantitative and observation was used to qualitative study. There were 128 basic community schools. Eleven schools were selected randomly. The interview schedule and observation checklist were the major tools of data collection. Collected data and information were analyzed both quantitatively as well as qualitatively as per their nature in the table. The findings of the study demonstrated that physical facilities in community schools in Pokhara Metropolitan City seem satisfactory. The researcher asked and observed the school sites. More than one quarter schools (27.3%) had peace and quiet place to teach. More than one-third school (36.4%) had satisfactory and the same (36.4%) had no open and enough space. The study also found that all schools had little raised and dry land and not to risk of sinking during the monsoon. More than half of the schools (54.5%) had the satisfactory situation on sufficient space and on adequate water and facility of waste disposal. From the observation, it was found that nearly two third schools had poor situation of restrooms without water and latches. It is concluded that the community schools tried their best to make child-friendly school environment, but those attempts were found to be insufficient. The study recommended that communication, cooperation, and coordination are needed among the stakeholders to plan for the quality education in 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".