MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197043583 · doi:10.22158/jar.v5n3p1

Online Education for Chinese Elementary and Secondary School Students: Experiences and Challenges

2021· article· en· W3197043583 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaobin Li

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Asian Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology-Enhanced Education Studies
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChristian ministryPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PsychologyNarrativeMathematics educationMedical educationOnline learningPedagogyPolitical scienceMedicineComputer scienceMultimedia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In addition to studying in schools where online learning has been increasing in recent years, many Chinese elementary and secondary school students participate in outside school online education programs, often urged by their parents so that their learning can be enhanced. Being descriptive, this is a literature review study. The purpose of this article is to provide a narrative of online education for Chinese students with regard to experiences and challenges in the last two years, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. The data sources of this paper are mainly documents published by the Ministry of Education, but literature published by other organizations and individuals are also referred to. Four hundred and twenty-three million Chinese had received online education by the end of March 2020. For elementary and secondary students, increasing online education in schools and outside schools plays a positive role in reducing the dropout number and provides other substantive benefits. In addition, online education for students during the pandemic allowed children to continue their learning without being on campus, but their overall experiences were mixed, and there were serious challenges to be dealt with.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.709
Threshold uncertainty score0.387

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.510
Teacher spread0.418 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Asian ResearchSame topicTechnology-Enhanced Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207