MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3133059174 · doi:10.5539/jel.v10n2p61

Case Study of the Parents’ Perception of the School Climate of a Rural Primary School in Tangshan, Hebei Province, China

2021· article· en· W3133059174 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rui Li, Mogana Dhamotharan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParental Involvement in Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFocus groupChinaPerceptionPsychologyCurriculumSchool climateMedical educationRural areaPedagogyGeographySociologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main aim of this study was to find out the perceptions of the parents about the rural school climate. This study was set in a selected rural primary school located in Hebei Province, in China. Data were collected using questionnaires and a semi-structured interview protocol. 103 parents participated in the questionnaire and 10 parents were invited to take part in the focus group interview. The findings in the questionnaires had revealed that parents had positive perceptions of the rural school climate. Inferential statistics further showed that there was no significant difference in parents’ perceptions based on education level, and the male parents’ perceptions of school administrators, teachers, and students were higher than the female parents. The focus group interview further revealed that parents felt that the rural schools were unable to establish a complete school curriculum, lacked a sufficient number of teachers, had a shortfall of adequate infrastructure, had school violence, inadequate extracurricular activities, and programs.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.124

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education and LearningSame topicParental Involvement in EducationFrench-language works237,207