MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2199859923 · doi:10.1007/978-94-6209-046-0

Critical Issues in Higher Education

2013· book· en· W2199859923 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Kompf

Bibliographic record

VenueSensePublishers eBooks · 2013
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education and Employability
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ideas and papers in this volume primarily showcase the work of a group of new scholars who will lead the next generation of educational practise and inquiry. While the topics explored are critical issues, the ways in which these new scholars have chosen to address them illustrates the diversity of voice, venue and value that has led them to present their work. Education and what it means has entered a new era in which the primary focus on education for the sake of education is strained. An educational free-for-all, in the sense of a no-holds-barred fight, seems in place as competition for market share, effective branding exercises and movement towards a client-based delivery of educational services (on demand as demanded) has been fuelled and compounded by litigation, accreditation, transfer credits and matters of patents, copyrights, ownership and monopoly. The link between education and financial well-being has been co-opted as the key to personal success. Unfortunately, the degree pursuit, often called the “paper chase” has become competitive for learners seeking scholarships, awards and entry into graduate school. This transition indicates movement from becoming well educated to employability potential paralleling much institutional retooling and sustenance of enhanced reputation and fiscal viability.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.021
Scholarly communication0.0150.011
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0060.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.003

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.313 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations20
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensePublishers eBooksSame topicHigher Education and EmployabilityFrench-language works237,207