Whither the university? The <i>Novum Trivium</i> and the transition from industrial to knowledge society
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Beyond the Bologna Process key objective of achieving a common structure of the European tertiary educational format is the fundamental issue of the changing content of higher education. The highly specialized curricula of the Industrial Society no longer fully meet the needs of an emerging Knowledge Society that requires citizens with entrepreneurial and inter-cultural capabilities to innovate and respond to change in an increasingly inter-connected world. In this article we propose an innovative approach to undergraduate education called the Novum Trivium, comprised of (i) academic specialization, (ii) innovation and entrepreneurship, and (iii) a language and culture in addition to one’s own, as a new higher-education paradigm for the Knowledge Society. This vision of undergraduate education aims to contribute to the realization of the Bologna Process objective of better integrating education, research and innovation. The Novum Trivium brings together three diverse, yet complementary, educational skill sets, in a modern version of the Tripos degree introduced by Cambridge University in the 17th century as an honours degree in mathematics that eventually became a format that encompassed three closely related disciplines such as politics, philosophy and economics. The Novum Trivium is also inspired by the medieval Trivium of grammar, rhetoric and dialectics (logic), the essential elements of education for all.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".