MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3177052404

The Practice Innovation and Standardization Construction of the Assessment for Civil Servant at the Basic Level: Based on the Research of W County in Chongqing

2015· article· en· W3177052404 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in sociology of science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Educational Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCivil servantStandardizationOpenness to experienceGrading (engineering)Civil servantsMeaning (existential)Engineering managementEngineeringPolitical sciencePsychologyCivil engineeringLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Strengthening the assessment for civil servant at the basic level is the basis requirements of four comprehensive strategy. This paper empirically studies the practice innovation and standardization construction of the assessment for civil servants at the grass-roots level which takes W county in Chongqing as an example. The study found that: although W county has been established and widely publicized the civil servant assessment system, and achieved remarkable achievement in   principles, contents, methods, procedures and results of assessment. but there are still non-standard problems such as the macro and abstract of assessment content, the non-conformance of method using, the lack of openness and feedback of procedure, the results highly concentrated and its use insufficient,etc.. That is because the understanding of assessment purpose and meaning is not clear, the scientific analysis and target management of strategy and position is lack, classified assessment is not scientific and meticulous, and process and standard is neither rigorous nor objective. therefore, this paper puts forward the standardization construction path of the civil servant assessment: to deepen the understanding of evaluation purpose and meaning  by strengthen the consciousness education; To establish the reasonable classification grading assessment system by sufficient investigation and scientific research; To determine scientifically the assessment contents and index system through strategic management, target management and position analysis; According to the authority of civil servants and job characteristics, to determine scientifically the assessment main body; To innovate assessment method and technology by perfecting assessment system;To improve the results of the assessment feedback and its use by optimization evaluation procedures.

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 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)0.038
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.720
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0380.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.048
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.385
GPT teacher head0.573
Teacher spread0.188 · 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