MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W652441083

The impact of the PDEF on the labour market outcomes of «high-skilled» workers in Senegal

2011· article· en· W652441083 on OpenAlexaff
Dorothée Boccanfuso, Alexandre Larouche, Mircea Trandafir

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicLabor market dynamics and wage inequality
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulationBusinessEconomic growthEconomicsDemographic economicsLabour economicsSociologyDemography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is through a United-Nations initiative and as part of the Millennium Goals that Senegal launched in 2000 the Development Program for Education and Formation (PDEF). Among others, this educational reform affected the sector of higher education. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the impact of the PDEF on the labour market outcomes of those individuals who reached this level of education. Specifically, we seek to determine whether individuals who have benefited from improvements from the reform are employed more often. Using data from two surveys on the Senegalese population, we use the method of difference-indifferences to estimate the effect of the reform. The main contribution of this paper is therefore to give a first overview of the impact attributable to the PDEF on the sample selected. Our approach determines a range of values for the true effect. Thus, our results show that the PDEF allows to benefit a positive advantage between 4.3 and 38.96 percentage points in the probability of being in employment.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.176

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.204 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLabor market dynamics and wage inequalityFrench-language works237,207