MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Creating High Performance Universities: The Malaysian Experience

2014· article· en· W256498363 on OpenAlexaff
Junainah Mahdee, Paul Teague

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Education An International Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Islamic Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper aims to assess the effort of upgrading the performance of Malaysian universities. Two interrelated arguments are developed in the paper as a proposed framework. First, the national public policy framework created to improve the status of higher education is an example of what Sabel and Zeitlin (2011) call Experimentalist Governance. The higher education public policy imposed by the government has given broad discretion to Malaysian universities to set their own targets through ‘learning by monitoring’. Second, to upgrade their performance, most universities have sought to deepen the intellectual capital which is argued by Stiles and Kulvisaechana (2003) as improving when innovations at complementary human capital, social capital, and organizational capital are successfully integrated. With the use of a case-study university from Malaysia, this paper portrays the innovations that the university has made.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.746
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 venueManagement Education An International JournalSame topicEducation and Islamic StudiesFrench-language works237,207