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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates whether the hiring of professors in Canada, a land of public universities and inexpensive tuition, is more equitable in terms of socioeconomic class than the hiring of their counterparts in the United States. Featuring original data on the degrees of all tenure track and tenured faculty members who teach in English doctoral programs in Canada, this article examines the relation between, on the one hand, the nationalities and the rankings of the programs in which these scholars obtained their degrees and, on the other, the tier of the programs in which these scholars teach. Employing previously unprocessed data from Statistics Canada and in dialogue with research on higher education, including the writings of Pierre Bourdieu, this article discusses the mechanisms through which faculty hiring patterns in Canadian English departments are strongly tied to PhD holders’ socioeconomic backgrounds. This study discusses the implications of such tracking patterns for first-generation university students—who comprise 38.8 percent of English doctoral recipients in Canada—when they seek positions in the professoriat.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it