A decade of doing things differently: Universities and public‐sector reform in Manitoba
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: In Manitoba, reform of the public sector under the rubric of new public management went into full swing during the 1990s. This article analyses this reform movement as it touched on universities and seeks to understand how successful government was in implementing its reform initiatives to internal management structures at universities. At issue is the ability of governments to promote reform initiatives in institutions that are self‐governed, autonomous and that deliver important services to the public. The article seeks to measure the scope, pace and nature of change in Manitoba's universities throughout the 1990s to assess whether or not the government's reform agenda was realized. Autonomy and the influence that government has over self‐governed agencies is a significant factor in the success of a particular reform agenda. Sommaire: Au Manitoba, la réforme du secteur public d'apres les principes de la Nouvelle gestion publique a pris toute son ampleur au cours des années 1990. Cet article prbénte une analyse de ce mouvement de réforme et son impact sur les universités, et cherche à comprendre le succés du gouvernements à intégrer ses initiatives de réforme aux structures de gestion interne des universités. Ce qui est en jeu c'est I'aptitude des gouvernements a promouvoir des initiatives de réforme dans des institutions qui sont autogérées, autonomes et qui fournissent d'importants services au public. L'article cherche à mesurer l'étendue, le rythme et la nature des change‐ments survenus dans les universités du Manitoba au cours des années 1990 pour évaluer si oui ou non le programme de réforme du gouvernement a été réalisé. L'autonomie que posséde le gouvemement et l'influence qu'il exerce sur les organis‐mes auto‐réglementés semblent être un facteur important pour déterminer le succés d'un programme de réforme particulier.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".