Non-Western Courses in Institutions in the Council of Christian Colleges and Universities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the 21st century, with the advent of globalization and virtually instantaneous electronic communication, the rest of the world impinges more on our consciousness and awareness than it ever has in the past. University-level education needs to prepare students to function in this interconnected world. Christian higher education should be especially concerned with providing such preparation, given Christianity's concern for creation, humanity, and the summons to love our neighbors as ourselves; those neighbors now unquestionably include the rest of the world. This article presents the results of research about non-Western courses (i.e., courses treating other regions of the world than Western Europe and North America) offered in the largest organization of such institutions in North America, the Council of Christian Colleges and Universities (CCCU). The authors examined the Web sites and calendars/catalogues of CCCU institutions for the academic years 2004–2005 and 2005–2006, identifying and classifying the relevant courses. The authors distinguished between general courses with a non-Western component or emphasis and courses specifically focused on a non-Western area. The conclusion offers an assessment of the current status of non-Western instruction in the curricula at CCCU institutions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".