MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317486751 · doi:10.22158/jecs.v7n1p14

A Case Study of Educational Equity in Saskatchewan Schools and Implications for Educational Development in China

2023· article· en· W4317486751 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ruining Jin, Xiao Wang, Lianghu Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Culture Studies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousMainstreamChinaIndigenous cultureEquity (law)Political sciencePedagogyFace (sociological concept)Ethnic groupObstacleEducational equityIndigenous educationSociologyEconomic growthSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper probes the phenomenon of underperforming indigenous students in Canada through a case study in the school district of Saskatchewan. It is discerned that the disparity between indigenous students’ home culture and the mainstream classroom culture is the major obstacle between indigenous students and academic success. Such a disparity is caused by a couple of reasons. First of all, educators’ misconception, along with education decision-makers’ ineffectiveness, leads to adversity for indigenous students to face in the classroom; secondly, biased evaluation and misjudgments in the current education system also result in indigenous students’ underperformance. Lastly, educators’ low cultural proficiency towards indigenous culture culminates in indigenous students’ low classroom engagement. The results of the case study could be enlightening for Chinese education decision-makers, given that the Chinese booming economy has caused millions of internal migrant workers to work in an alien subculture, their children could face similar social and linguistic debacles as compared to indigenous students in Saskatchewan.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.553
Teacher spread0.415 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education and Culture StudiesSame topicMultilingual Education and PolicyFrench-language works237,207