Review of "The Community Engagement and Service Mission of Universities"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inman, P., & Schuetze, H.G. (Eds.) (2010). The Community Engagement and Service Mission of Universities. Leicester: National Institute of Adult Continuing Education. Pages: 342. Price USD $27.70 (paperback).This book is a collection of papers based on presentations at a conference hosted by PASCAL International Observatory and the Centre for Policy Studies in Higher Education and Training at the University of British Columbia in May, 2009 in Vancouver. One purpose of the conference was to advance the work of PASCAL's PURE project (PASCAL Universities' Regional Engagement). This major research initiative seeks to arrive at a better understanding of the 'third mission' of universities and to promote the concept that universities must be engaged with their regions and that regions should consider universities and higher education institutions to be one of their greatest assets for regional cultural, social, and economic development. The project takes as its starting point that teaching and research are the first two missions of a university and that engagement with their regions or communities is often considered a mission.The Community Engagement and Service Mission of Universities provides useful descriptions of some contemporary activities taking place around the world, but mostly in America. The introduction by the editors includes a quick sketch of the contents of each chapter, but leads off with a useful short explanation of the PASCAL International Observatory and its origins in a series of conferences and related studies of learning cities and learning regions sponsored by the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). It also includes a discussion of the somewhat nebulous and disputed concept of the third mission of universities.Six of the eighteen chapters, along with the introductory chapter by the editors, address broad issues related to the role of universities in regional development and their third variously defined, including trends affecting re-conceptions of the mission, lessons to be learned from tensions in engagement, particular problems in engaging in regional economic development, benchmarking engagement, measuring the impact of partnerships, and institutionalizing university community engagement. Several authors address the thorny issues of rewarding service activities and dealing with collective agreements in universities.The remaining 12 chapters are grouped in Part 2 of the volume, titled North American perspectives and experience and recall a richer history of engagement in the United States than is generally acknowledged and draw insights from a range of case studies of engagement by universities chiefly in the United States, Canada, and Mexico. Much is made of the importance of leadership, respectful and mutually beneficial partnerships, and adequate financing; the critical significance of understanding power imbalances in partnerships; and of the relevance of context. Several papers focus on very specific communities, including rural Mexico, Aboriginal communities, and francophone communities in Canada outside Quebec. One addresses 'translational science' as a way of engaging the communities of practice in clinics and industry to help improve operational protocols, help research innovations become marketable products, and contribute to scientific governance and policy development. …
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".