Between Representations: Identity Crisis and the Bureaucratization of the University
Bibliographic record
Abstract
“Between Representations” is an attempt to think the nature of the crisis of the university by re-engaging with the thought of Bill Readings and George Grant. The discussion is situated in the context of a more general crisis of representation manifest in recent attempts to celebrate Canada’s coming 150 years since Confederation. While the essay begins with an indication of the continuity of Readings’s with Grant’s argument, it focuses on Grant’s argument that the university today works to legitimate the techno-capitalist society of which it is a part and develops his suggestion that this is most significant in the context of the humanities and social sciences where it is least apparent. In developing Grant’s argument, the essay turns to questions of pedagogy and in particular the meaning and mode of engaging with “theory”. In considering the nature of theory, the paper suggests one possible mode of engaging with the crisis of representation that centres on work conducted in the classroom.
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 | 0.008 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.069 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.022 | 0.019 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".