MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413954943 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v17n9p90

School Governance and Learner Performance in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Neural Networks Approach

2025· article· en· W4413954943 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sylvain Kouassi ASSIENIN, Auguste K. Kouakou, Loukou L. E. Yobouet

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology-Enhanced Education Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate governanceArtificial neural networkPolitical scienceDevelopment economicsMathematics educationEconomic systemEconomic growthEconomic geographyEconomicsComputer sciencePsychologyArtificial intelligenceFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this paper is to analyse the impact of school governance on learner performance in Sub-Saharan Africa, in the face of persistent low performance in the region, revealed by the PASEC 2019 report. The study uses an econometric model followed by machine learning models (Regression Logistic, Random Forest, Extra Tress Classifier, Extreme Gradient Boosting, Artificial Neural Networks) to explore the relationships between school results and governance factors measured by school management, pedagogical practices and relations with stakeholders. The results show that artificial neural network models perform better than conventional approaches in terms of accuracy and explainability. Explainability by Shapley values shows that the quality of administrative and pedagogical management, benevolent school-student relations, and activities to promote the best students significantly improve performance. The study suggests capacity building for managers in order to improve the quality of administrative and pedagogical management. It also highlights the need to promote rigorous administrative governance, based on effective practices and adapted to local realities. In addition, specific strategies should be put in place to reward high-performing students, while encouraging professional collaboration between education stakeholders. Finally, a review of parental involvement practices is recommended in order to avoid inappropriate expectations likely to be detrimental to learners’ performance.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicTechnology-Enhanced Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207