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 OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lijuan Sun, Qi Wang, Jiang Wu

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.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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

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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in sociology of scienceSame topicInnovative Educational TechniquesFrench-language works237,207