The Formation Logic and Counteractions of Parents' Educational Anxiety Accompanying the Introduction of Double Reduction Policy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
After the implementation of “double reduction” policy, parental education anxiety becomes a hit subject in the society. Aimed to figure out formation logic and countermeasures of it, this paper adopts literature survey method, through numerous researches, discovers that on the one hand, the policy has comprehensively standardized cram schooling market, optimized the homework design and relieved students’ burden, which renders the overall educational ecology sustainable. But on the other hand, affected by multiple factors, such as the weakening function of family education, the imbalance between the supply and demand of educational resources, single selection criterion and unpredictable educational deviation, parents’ educational anxiety keeps swelling, bearing several features like the heterogeneity of anxiety, classification of anxious crowds, different stages of anxiety and intergenerational mobility. Therefore, only by synchronous implementation of multiple measures, reconstructing education ecological system, standardizing the policy and continuing to strengthen faculty force, can we relieve parental education anxiety and give a push to the genuine implementation of “double reduction” policy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".