MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404620147 · doi:10.53555/sfs.v10i1.3192

Quality Of Education And Some Barriers: Especially In Higher Educational Institutions (Rural Colleges) And It’s Impacts On Society

2023· article· en· W4404620147 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Santosh Akura

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Survey in Fisheries Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Governance and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality (philosophy)Higher educationPolitical scienceEconomic growthMedical educationSociologyBusinessEconomicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Education is the mirror of a society. A nation can be built through education and for that teaching-learning approaches, are applied. Every conscious person in a society puts their focus on education and for this we are looking basically for quality. Quality education is one of the main factors of competitive advantages. Globalisation has created more competitive environment, which in turn have created a challenging market in the field of education, especially for HEI’s. The quality of education, particularly in higher educational institutions located in rural areas, significantly impacts society on multiple levels. Despite efforts to improve accessibility and inclusivity, rural colleges often face unique challenges that impede the delivery of quality education. This abstract explores these challenges and their broader societal implications. Limited resources constitute a significant barrier to quality education in rural Colleges. Outdated infrastructure, shortage of qualified faculties, slow learners and inadequate funding are the main barriers to qualified faculties, slow learners and inadequate funding are the main barriers to quality education. Moreover, the lack of technology and learning material further exacerbates the disparity in educational outcomes. The technological divide not only affects individual students and hampers rural communities’ overall development and competitiveness. Furthermore, geographical isolation and social attitudes towards rural education are also some short of barriers. Due to these inequalities, Students in rural areas may not receive the same level of education as urban areas. This work mainly based on fieldwork activities; the Study highlights the difference between rural and urban education systems and it finds out the reason for varied levels of quality in the education system which is provided by a country (but varies at rural vs urban level), it helps to find out the factors which is generally responsible for making a difference in the quality of education (Low versus high quality) and will try to find out some positive sign to overcome from such obstacles and also for fostering social equity, economic development, regional prosperity.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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 head0.241
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.161 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Survey in Fisheries SciencesSame topicHigher Education Governance and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207