MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404352574 · doi:10.1007/978-981-97-7415-9_4

Secondary Education (High School) in China

2024· book-chapter· en· W4404352574 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Lu Cao, Ruoxi Chen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Educational Reforms and Inequalities
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUC Berkeley College of ChemistryUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillUniversity of California, Los AngelesUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUniversity of Science and Technology of ChinaKorea Advanced Institute of Science and TechnologyHokkaido UniversityTsinghua UniversityNorthwestern UniversityYork UniversityYonsei UniversityUniversity of OxfordUniversity College LondonUniversity of California, San DiegoYale UniversitySeoul National UniversityStrongUniversity of ChicagoLondon School of Economics and Political ScienceUniversity of WashingtonPrinceton UniversityJohns Hopkins UniversityUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonBrown UniversityMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyHarvard UniversityCalifornia Institute of TechnologyUniversity of PennsylvaniaZhejiang UniversityImperial College LondonMassachusetts Institute of Technology
KeywordsChinaMathematics educationGeographyPolitical sciencePsychologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Secondary education or high school in China refers to the general upper secondary educationUpper secondary education, which aligns with the International Standard Classification of EducationInternational Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) (ISCED) Level 3. In China, this stage typically includes students aged 15 to 18 years old, corresponding to grade levels 10 to 12, and excludes vocational educationVocational education. This chapter reports the current stage of China’s high school education, focusing on the key themes of educational effectiveness and resource allocation. It utilizes data sourced from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the 2018 PISA database, and official statistics from the Ministry of EducationMinistry of Education (MOE) of China (MOE) and other countries. The data indicates that, in international comparisons, Chinese high school students lead in gross enrollmentEnrollment rates, graduation ratesGraduation rate, and academic performancePerformance. Notable accomplishments in educational infrastructureInfrastructure, such as science labs, multimedia-equipped classrooms, and widespread Wi-Fi accessAccess in schools, are also highlighted. Nevertheless, compared to many developed countries, China faces challenges in several key indicators, including the total spending per full-time student, the proportion of teachers holding a master’s degreeDegreemaster’s degree or higher, and the percentage of students gaining admission to top 4-year universities. This chapter also presents best practices and inspiring stories and within China’s high school education, and it examines recent trends through the lens of the latest research, national policies, and recommendations for the future.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.155

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.002

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 topicGlobal Educational Reforms and InequalitiesFrench-language works237,207