General education policy, national education policy, and AI education policy as nested formal contexts.
CDC LedgerThree-layer nesting
Every row is rendered into the graph as a formal CDC node.Domain Relation MapDomain Relations
Political GovernanceGovernment control vs school autonomy
Control preserves public goals; autonomy preserves institutional vitality.
contradicts
Economic-FiscalPublic equity vs resource efficiency
Funding policy often turns scarcity into visible value conflict.
contradicts
Social LivelihoodUniversal access vs quality competition
Admission, school choice, and regional balance sit here.
contradicts
Cultural EducationCommon values vs plural growth
Curricular legitimacy requires both shared identity and individual development.
contradicts
Professional EducationLong-term literacy vs short-term examination pressure
Assessment reform should name this tension explicitly.
contradicts
Technology-DigitalInnovation efficiency vs safety risk
AI education policy specializes this domain tension.
contradicts
AI Education PolicyAI Education
Tech empowermentcontradictsEthics and safety
Smart inclusioncontradictsDigital divide
AI iteration speedcontradictsInstitutional stability
Market innovationcontradictsPublic good nature
Capability GraphCapability Graph
1Domain-relation mapping
Classify a policy issue and identify its structural tension.
2Context-value reasoning
Explain why one concept may carry different meanings across policy domains.
3Relation-type discrimination
Separate contradiction from influence, requirement, specialization, or analogy.
4Evidence status tracking
Choose direct or qualified language based on accepted/proposed status.
5Cross-scale nesting
Reason across general, national, and AI education policy layers.
Why-Q AssessmentDomain-relation mapping
Given a policy such as county high-school trusteeship reform, which domain does it belong to and what is the core tension?
L0Cannot assign a domain or randomly applies multiple domains.L1Assigns a domain but cannot name the tension.L2Names domain and tension, but not relation type.L3Names domain, tension, relation type, and policy tools.L4Explains multiple domain readings and context-specific values.
Why-Q AssessmentEvidence status tracking
Which claims can be stated directly in a formal report, and which require qualifiers such as 'this framework assumes'?
L0Uses one certainty level for all claims.L1Knows distinction is needed but cannot classify claims.L2Separates accepted references from proposed analytical tensions.L3Uses qualifiers correctly in writing.L4Names what evidence would upgrade a proposed claim.
Report Builder LogicReport Mapping
Context RegistryResearch scope
Declare country, stage, and time window; do not assume universal transferability.
Domain-Relation MapCore tensions
Classify the domain before naming the relation and relation type.
CDC StatusClaim footnotes
Accepted claims can be direct; proposed claims need qualified language.
Reasoning GraphsArgument structure
Keep counter-nodes such as model independence; do not show only support chains.
Capability GraphMethod limitations
List the checking abilities users need, not only 'for reference'.