MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093638422 · doi:10.1177/009155210102900306

Book Review: Globalizing the Community College: Strategies for Change in the Twenty-First Century

2001· article· en· W2093638422 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Paula Zeszotarski

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunity College Review · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Governance and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobalizationSociologyPoliticsHigher educationPortraitPolitical scienceSocial scienceLawHistoryArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Globalizing the Community College: Strategies for Change in the Twenty-First Century by John S. Levin. Palgrave, New York, NY. 2001, 248 pages. $35, hardcover, ISBN 0-312-23906-8. Reviewed by Paula Zeszotarski. In his comparison of seven case studies from two nations, John S. Levin provides a revealing portrait of the community college as a late twentieth-century organization. Levin accurately depicts some of the key influences on contemporary higher education through the lens of globalization theory. By focusing on the descriptive rather than the predictive, Levin improves on many theoretical discussions of globalization. However, the author could have made a further contribution to globalization theory by demonstrating how his evidence challenges certain central beliefs about globalization. The purpose of Levin's study is to demonstrate the effect of certain external forces on internal changes in community colleges. Levin asserts that globalization is chief among these forces in the late 1990s. For Levin, globalization is multidimensional. While the global economy played a dominant role in institutional behaviors and actions, other global flows such as culture and information technology affected institutions (p.xviii). To this end, Levin studied a total of seven colleges in the United States and Canada. Beginning in April 1996, Levin conducted formal and informal interviews with students, faculty, and staff; observed institutional activities; and analyzed governmental and institutional documents. Levin devotes one chapter of analysis to each of the four, interrelated domains: economic, cultural, information, and political. Drawing on the literature of the effect of globalization on higher education, Levin identifies behaviors associated with the impact of globalization on higher education and examines them within the context of the four domains. These behaviors were not present in all organizations studied, nor were they unilaterally observable in any one organization. The result of this study is an accurate and insightful portrait of contemporary community colleges. The changing role of the state was the primary influence on community college behavior in the economic domain. Most colleges experienced a decrease in state funding and the loss of their primary economic support sent colleges scrambling to do more with less and to seek other (private) sources of revenue. At the same time, states actively promoted productivity, often through establishing performance measures. College responses were characterized by internationalization, marketization, productivity and efficiency, restructuring, and commodification. Marketization and internationalization (see below) occurred partially as a result of decreased state support. Colleges sought new sources of revenue from contract training partnerships with local and foreign businesses and governments, increasing tuition fees for local students and admitting more international students, and donations from the private sector. Marketization meant curricular changes in the form of a new focus on vocational programs. Productivity and efficiency became the buzz words of education in the last decades of the twentieth century. Individual colleges responded to this external pressure differently. Some expanded course offerings in high demand areas and other systematized program reviews that resulted in program revision or reduction. Most colleges became more reliant on part-time faculty, a trend that was widespread throughout American community colleges at the time. A related behavior, organizational restructuring, was motivated by financial, personnel, and cultural considerations. Financially, colleges responded to revenue shortfalls by laying off workers and downsizing operations. Personnel changes came as a result of reclassification of employees and the use of team instead of autonomous structures for faculty. In response to this new economic environment, commodification of programs was demonstrated by the marketing of special programs such as distance and international education and the infusion of marketable skills into traditional education. …

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.016

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunity College ReviewSame topicHigher Education Governance and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207