MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W259729160 · doi:10.1177/002070200706200208

Divided Discipline?

2007· article· en· W259729160 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michael Lipson, Daniel Maliniak, Amy Oakes, Susan Peterson, Michael J. Tierney

Notice bibliographique

RevueInternational Journal Canada s Journal of Global Policy Analysis · 2007
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueInternational Relations and Foreign Policy
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPoliticsSubject (documents)CurriculumSociologyPolitical scienceInternational relationsForeign policyPublic administrationMedia studiesLawLibrary science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

(ProQuest-CSA LLC: ... denotes text stops here in original.)The centre of gravity for the academic discipline of relations is located in the United States, but Canada boasts a vibrant academic community of relations scholars.' Through their teaching, research, and consultations with policymakers, Canadian IR scholars influence how Canadian citizens and policymakers think about world politics, and sometimes directly affect the practice of Canadian foreign policy itself. federal Liberal party's recent leadership race came down to a choice between two former academics: Michael Ignatieff and Stephane Dion. Prime Minister Stephen Harper is associated with the so-called Calgary school of conservative scholars in the University of Calgary's political science department/ However, the views of Canadian IR scholars and their influence on public opinion and foreign policy have not been a subject of systematic study.This article reports results from a survey of IR faculty at Canadian universities conducted in 2006.' survey extends a study of US college and university IR professors originally conducted by scholars at the College of William and Mary in 2004 and repeated in 2oo6.4 biennial teaching, research, and politics (TRIP) survey consists of questions in four parts, dealing with teaching practice and curricula, the academic discipline of relations, issues related to research-including theoretical perspectives employed, methodologies, and topics studied-and views on current and historical policy issues/ 2004 survey organizers attempted to contact every instructor teaching IR courses at the university level in the United States. In 2006 the survey was repeated in the US and extended to Canada.6 2006 US survey received responses from 1,112 ascholars. Canadian survey was completed by no of 275 scholars contacted at Canadian universities.7 smaller size of the Canadian survey makes its findings subject to greater uncertainty. Nonetheless, it offers the most comprehensive overview of the field of Canadian IR. survey paints a portrait of a vital intellectual community of Canadian IR scholars that is simultaneously distinct from, and heavily influenced by, its US counterpart. At the same time, the Canadian academic community is more closely aligned with and influenced by its European and particularly British colleagues in terms of theory, methodology, and epistemology.INSIDE THE IVORY TOWER: THE VIEW FROM CANADADescribing the results of the 2004 US survey in Foreign Policy, Peterson, Tierney, and Maliniak noted, The relations field today is surprisingly young. Half of the professors who teach at US colleges today received their PhDs in the past 12 years.* A similar pattern holds for Canadian IR instructors in the 2006 survey. median year for completion of the doctorate was 1995, and the average age was 44. Respondents were evenly distributed across academic ranks, with 30 percent each at the assistant and full professor levels, and 29 percent at the associate level. Nearly all the rest held positions as lecturers or instructors, with one percent each reporting positions as emeritus faculty and other. Canadian IR, like its US cousin, is dominated by men, with women accounting for only 26 percent of respondents.Some interesting differences emerge in the portrait of the two IR communities. Canadian IR, for instance, appears to be more international than American IR. Thirty-six percent of instructors at Canadian universities were born outside of Canada, while only 15 percent of US respondents indicated a country of origin outside the United States. Forty-six percent of Canadian faculty received their PhDs outside of Canada, while only four percent of Americans received their degrees outside the United States. A third of the Canadian respondents reported receiving their PhDs from one of four institutions: York University, the University of Toronto, the University of British Columbia, and Carleton University. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,689
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,009
Tête enseignante GPT0,374
Écart entre enseignants0,364 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations9
Publié2007
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueInternational Journal Canada s Journal of Global Policy AnalysisMême sujetInternational Relations and Foreign PolicyTravaux en français237 207