MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019713052 · doi:10.1017/s0008423906060367

A Question of Balance: The Cult of Research Intensivity and the Professing of Political Science in Canada: Presidential address to the Canadian Political Science Association, Toronto, Ontario, June 2, 2006

2006· article· en· W2019713052 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Political Science · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Teaching Methodologies in Social Sciences
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCultHumanitiesPolitical sciencePoliticsPresidential systemSociologyLawArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. In 1998, Tom Pocklington's presidential address examined what he believed was a progressive displacement of teaching by research in Canadian political science departments. The purpose of this address is to examine Pocklington's contentions eight years on, after dramatic increases in research funds flowing to Canadian universities. As research funds become more important to the financial health of Canadian universities, we have seen the growth in Canada of what I argue is a “cult of research intensivity.” I argue that the cult has serious implications both for the research that political scientists will do, and for our teaching of undergraduate students. However, I conclude that we need to put the reverential enthusiasm for research intensivity in broader perspective, given the perennial concerns that are expressed over the imbalance between teaching and research. Résumé. En 1998, dans son message annuel, le président Tom Pocklington s'était penché sur ce qui lui apparaissait comme la substitution progressive de la recherche à l'enseignement dans les départements de science politique au Canada. Notre objectif ici est d'analyser les propos de Tom Pocklington quelque huit ans plus tard, à la suite des hausses impressionnantes des fonds de recherche versés aux universités canadiennes. À mesure que les subventions de recherche prennent de plus en plus d'importance pour la santé financière des universités canadiennes, nous voyons dans ce pays l'expansion de ce que j'appellerais le “ culte de la prédominance de la recherche ”. Je soutiens que ce culte a de sérieuses implications tant pour les recherches que mèneront les politologues que pour l'enseignement que nous dispenserons aux étudiants de premier cycle. Je conclus que nous devons replacer dans un contexte plus vaste cet enthousiasme à tous crins à l'égard de la recherche, étant donné les préoccupations qu'a toujours soulevées le déséquilibre entre l'enseignement et la recherche.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.091
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.100
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.796
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0910.100
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.049
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.353 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it