MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2976906710 · doi:10.1177/1077800419878750

Technologies of Governance in Context: Four Global Windows Into Neoliberalism and Audit Culture in Higher Education

2019· article· en· W2976906710 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueQualitative Inquiry · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFeminist Theory and Gender Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeoliberalism (international relations)AccountabilityExcellenceContext (archaeology)Corporate governancePublic administrationSociologyPoliticsPolitical scienceHigher educationAuditSocial scienceManagementLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This partial special issue of Qualitative Inquiry, titled “Technologies of Governance in Context: Four Global Windows Into Neoliberalism and Audit Culture in Higher Education,” examines various aspects of the academic impact of neoliberal technologies from four context-specific locations that include Australia, Mexico, the United Kingdom, and the United States, in addition to my own Canadian perspective in this introduction. It is based on a similarly themed plenary panel that was held in 2018 as part of the 14th Annual International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry at University of Illinois, Urbana–Champaign titled “The Politics, Places, Forms, and Effects of Accountability, Quality Assurance, and/or Excellence Frameworks in these Global Troubled Times.”

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.186
Threshold uncertainty score0.346

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.331 · 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