The engagement of African expatriate scholars in higher education in Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For more than a decade, the engagement of the African academic diaspora in higher education in Africa has been closely scrutinized in the social science literature. The question is all the more noteworthy given that African universities have been facing unprecedented challenges: a shortage of lecturers to teach the growing cohorts of students and the extremely low proportion of full professors allowed to supervise master’s and Ph.D. candidates are just a few examples. However, this article is derived from our sense of dissatisfaction upon reading the few studies that deal with this question, works that are largely characterized by a lack of empirical rigor. It is built on a body of rich and years-long fieldwork research in four countries in sub-Saharan Africa (South Africa, Ghana, Niger, and Nigeria), as well as interviews with African academics teaching in the U.S. and Canada. Based on a finely-tailored methodology, the article examines the nature of the resources that circulate to African universities from the academic diaspora; it also analyzes the causes of their unequal distribution. The article demonstrates in fine that the African engagement in higher education is not essentially the consequence of their subscription to a prescriptive patriotism. To be sure, the African academic diaspora are willing to contribute to the wellbeing of their continent. But the choice of the resources they share as well as the identity of their colleagues in Africa who directly benefit from these resources reveal that the structural constraints inherent to the academic profession ultimately inform their engagement in Africa.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".