MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403880097 · doi:10.17323/vo-2024-16870

Quality of Early Childhood Education and Care in Kazakhstan: The First Nationwide Study

2024· article· en· W4403880097 on OpenAlexaff
Gaukhar Kiikova, Altynay Bektemirova, А.Г. Рамазанова, Zhazira Issina, Sogdiana Chukurova

Bibliographic record

VenueVoprosy Obrazovaniya/ Educational Studies Moscow · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Socioeconomic and Political Dynamics
Canadian institutionsEducation and Early Childhood Development
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality (philosophy)Early childhood educationPolitical scienceEnvironmental healthMedicineEconomic growthPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Currently, Kazakhstan has the highest enrolment rate in the history of early childhood education and care (ECEC), with 98% enrolment for children aged three to six years old. With this significant expansion of ECEC, there is a lack of sufficient evidence on its overall quality. This study is the first countrywide study aimed to evaluate the ECEC quality in Kazakhstan using the internationally recognized Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale (ECERS-3). We looked at 50 preschool classrooms from all regions of Kazakhstan. The preschools had different combinations of the following characteristics: located in urban/rural areas; state/private; with Russian/Kazakh-language instruction. The scores demonstrated ‘below the minimal’ quality of ECEC in Kazakhstan. No correlation was found between the quality of ECEC and regions or types of settlement. Findings revealed such problems as deprivation of play, predominance of teacher-led pedagogy, large child-to-staff ratio and others. Children are not offered adequate amounts or variety of cognitively stimulating opportunities that would support their development and learning. There was a statistically significant difference in quality depending on the language of instruction. Kazakh groups were more likely to score worse than Russian ones (N=47, p=.026). The reasons for these findings are numerous, both due to the complexity of the ‘quality’ notion, as well as various issues that influence the quality of ECEC in Kazakhstan.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.164

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.306
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

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 venueVoprosy Obrazovaniya/ Educational Studies MoscowSame topicGlobal Socioeconomic and Political DynamicsFrench-language works237,207