Management Education in a Public University in the Economic Periphery: Reflections in Action on UBC in Interior British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Significant changes in university organisation over recent years have often ignored important challenges concerning the consequences for social and economic development. This paper explores different ways of organising universities. It examines a particular question: what should management education in a public university in the economic periphery entail? The paper relies on the literature on both economic organization and universities, and considers the case of the University of British Columbia’s Faculty of Management. It is partly based on the author’s reflections in action. The paper discusses the drawbacks of equating management education with the activities of typical business schools. The relevance of business schools, and the downsides of their tendency to serve and promote large, for-profit corporations as the drivers of a particular variant of free market economy, are both explored. Equating management and business fails to account for much of the diverse reality of organizing, managing and leading social and economic activity in practice, and constrains what might be imagined. It also fails the public interest. The paper draws on Deweyan analysis and advocates a journey of inquiry into what management education in a public university in the economic periphery should entail. It suggests a public interest forum in which diverse citizens, employees, entrepreneurs, leaders, managers, and consumers learn to inquire freely and openly about the future of management education. The paper thereby addresses how to begin planning and shaping the consequences of territory-sensitive university education more generally.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.055 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".