MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Higher Education Concerns for Natives in the Post-Crisis Period

2014· book-chapter· en· W2476155781 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rituparna Das, Mononita Kundu Das

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in higher education and professional development book series · 2014
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican cultural and philosophical studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPillarGovernment (linguistics)Position (finance)Political scienceHigher educationPrivate sectorEconomic growthPeriod (music)Development economicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The higher education and academic research sectors of the Canadian education sector were victims of the 2008 global crisis. Those institutions that were relying on private funding suffered from crashing values of their endowments amidst a declining market. With shrinking government budget and the universities finding tough time in the higher education and research sector, the aboriginals of Canada would be at the most disadvantageous position with respective to their economic development, since education is a central pillar to what Amartya Sen calls “entitlements and capabilities” of a community, particularly when colonialism left aboriginal peoples among the poorest of Canadians. The higher education sector of India is cited as a similar case here. This chapter examines the impact of declining funding both from private and government sources and other adversaries to the access of the aboriginals to education and thus attempts to bring to light how many educational opportunities are available to the natives in the post-crisis period in a comparative tone with India.

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)0.002
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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0140.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.362
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in higher education and professional development book seriesSame topicAfrican cultural and philosophical studiesFrench-language works237,207