MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

University Management in the Western Sociology of Higher Education

2020· article· en· W3047310573 on OpenAlex
П. А. Амбарова, G. E. Zborovsky

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Education and science journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Governance and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRussian Foundation for Basic Research
KeywordsSociologyRelevance (law)Higher educationNoveltyAcademic communityProcess (computing)Social scienceEngineering ethicsPolitical sciencePsychologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction . In recent decades, the issues of management of higher education have been actively developed in sociology. The relevance of this topic is reflected in the increasing importance of university activities in the life of society and the conflict situation within scientific and educational organisations, which has developed due to the ambiguous attitude of the academic community towards the university management and the entrepreneurial model of university management. The aim of the present publication is to analyse and generalise Western sociological studies on university management issues. Methodology and research methods . The present research is based on comparative analysis methodology. In the course of analytical review, international experience in university management was investigated. Results and scientific novelty . Social prerequisites, contradictions and implications of transformation of managerial practices in universities are identified and described. The authors of the present article characterise theoretical models of these practices, types and forms of interaction of the university management structure with the academic community. The professionalisation process among managers employed in higher school is outlined. The authors demonstrate the ideas, discussions and new trends of university research projects in the United States, Canada, France, England, Spain, Germany, Holland, Nordic and other Western countries from a critical perspective. The choice is based on the development of sociology as science and the real achievements in higher education systems in these countries. Thee authors promote the idea that leading Western sociologists not only recorded objective evolutionary changes, their results and quantitative indicators for a long period of time, but also revealed the essence of antinomic explicit and latent processes, which accompany university reforms and their administrative structures. It is emphasised that through a sociological perspective these scientists managed to show the quintessence of social relations, behavioural strategies and value systems, which emerge in the university community and serve as the main resource of development of modern universities. Practical significance . It is obvious that the Russian higher school is moving along the same trajectory as Western universities, and it is unlikely to leave this track, so when looking at the advantages and disadvantages of foreign experience, the authors of the present article tried to find out the prospects for the Russian system of higher education and possible vectors of its management development. In this regard, the materials of the current publication can be useful both for sociologists of higher education and for practitioners working in the field of university management.

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 score0.478
Threshold uncertainty score0.437

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 studies0.0010.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.311 · 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