Editorial: student affairs in complex contexts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While the Western world – with Brexit, Trump, Festung Europa, and so forth – seems to be increasingly retreating into narrow nationalism, the Journal of Student Affairs in Africa is connecting African academics, executives and administrators and is becoming an evermore accessed international, African platform for publishing research on higher education and Student Affairs in Africa. In this issue, we do not only publish several commentaries on the recent Global Summit of Student Affairs and Services held in October 2016 at Stellenbosch University, South Africa. We also publish contributions from Ethiopia alongside articles from Australia, the USA, and universities in South Africa (University of the Free State, University of Johannesburg). Moreover, the first 2017 issue will be guest edited by colleagues from the International Association of Student Affairs and Services (IASAS), which will look beyond the African continent with contributions from Australia, Canada, China, Europe and America. Dissatisfaction and frustration with political leaders have sent students pouring out into the streets, demanding free education in South Africa, demanding an increase on higher education funding in Ireland and protesting the presidential election outcome in the US. In the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Minister of Higher Education has ordered a freeze on fee increments following student protests, while in Niger student protests have pushed the government to agree to provide additional funding for higher education. On the African continent, there are various challenges facing Student Affairs professionals, for example, providing support to students whose payments by the Tanzania’s Higher Education Student Loan Board (HESLB) have been delayed due to administrative problems in providing correct student data and student results. In Egypt, there is need to support students returning to institutional residential life at the Al Azhar Seminary where the facility was closed for two years. There is need to support Student Affairs colleagues, academics and students in Nigeria where unpaid salary increments threaten the educational project.
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 | 0.006 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.015 | 0.021 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.014 |
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".