MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402279511 · doi:10.5539/ies.v17n5p45

Intervention Strategies in Nepal’s School-Level Education Programs for the Country’s Socioeconomic Transformation

2024· article· en· W4402279511 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jeevanath Devkota, Devid Kumar Basyal

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPoverty, Education, and Child Welfare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocioeconomic statusIntervention (counseling)PsychologyMathematics educationEconomic growthSociologyPedagogySocioeconomicsDemographyPopulationEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The deficiency in providing quality education is a significant challenge across many developing nations. This study examines the connection between the education system and the level of socioeconomic issues in the context of Nepal. The main argument is that Nepal’s gender-related issues, the training gap among its populace concerning pro-environmental behavior, lateness habits, skill deficiency among the young generation, and unstable economic growth are directly or indirectly connected to the country’s education system. Nepal’s school-level educational programs and teaching methods are less practical for fostering human capital and economic progress than Japanese educational programs. Based on the context of Nepal, human capital theory, and research literature pertaining to educational programs, we propose a comprehensive intervention model composed of several non-academic programs, including physical education, community cleaning, and school textiles, designed to augment Nepal’s social and economic development.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.356 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education StudiesSame topicPoverty, Education, and Child WelfareFrench-language works237,207