MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377098973 · doi:10.56028/aehssr.5.1.281.2023

The differences and social influencing factors between contemporary Chinese and Western education systems: Discussion based on teacher-student interaction

2023· article· en· W4377098973 on OpenAlex
Xiaofang Cai

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Education Humanities and Social Science Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEducation Practices and Challenges
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreativityAutonomyAffect (linguistics)PsychologyPedagogyElement (criminal law)Mathematics educationSociologySocial psychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Education is a critical element in shaping individuals' lives, and as the world becomes more interconnected, research on the impact of different educational systems on student outcomes is gaining interest. A crucial aspect of this research is the teacher-student relationship, which can significantly affect students' autonomy and creativity. This article explores the differences in the teacher-student relationship in Western and Chinese educational systems and their impact on student outcomes. The article argues that a relationship that is equal, respectful, and interactive can help stimulate students' autonomy and creativity, leading to the development of free citizens

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
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 head0.189
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.279 · 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