La praxis de la excelencia universitaria entre la paranoia de sus promotores y la culpa de sus víctimas: hacia la recuperación del deseo docente y la universidad pública
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The University of Valencia was the only university in Spain which had not approved the Docentia programme until 2015. This program appeared in 2006, on the stage of the integration of the Spanish Higher Education System within the European Higher Education Area (EHEA). The National Agency for Quality Assessment and Accreditation of Spain (ANECA) proposed/imposed a new program sought to control and manage, in business terms, teaching (Dardot & Laval; 2013) to the whole of the Spanish public universities, in entrepreneurial terms the teaching activity. This work situates the program in the process of commodification of the Spanish public university where coexist on par excellence carrot and stick of precarious work and teaching, the paranoia of the excellence and the guilt of their victims. The example of the University of Valencia is used to show Union alternatives and educational responses. Then it is argued that the recovery of the public University, understood as a ’common good’, as well as teaching desire (Hill, 2015) passes through reactivates University ideological response and resistance movements.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".