MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3176484757 · doi:10.1080/21568235.2021.1944252

Varieties of state commitment to higher education since 1945: toward a comparative-historical social science of postsecondary expansion

2021· article· en· W3176484757 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mitchell L. Stevens, Екатерина Шибанова

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Higher Education · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Governance and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHigher educationPoliticsState (computer science)CommoditySociologyPolitical scienceAsset (computer security)Social scienceEconomic growthPolitical economyPublic administrationEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We provide a framework for integrating sociological and political-historical approaches to the worldwide expansion of higher education in the twentieth century. Doing so enables scholars and policymakers to better identify variation across place and time in how the provision of higher education has been rendered culturally meaningful and politically feasible. We identify three conceptions of state commitment to higher education: as a national asset, a citizen right, and a commodity. The conceptions are not mutually exclusive and can simultaneously animate national cultures and politics. We also suggest a novel periodization of global higher education history from 1945 to the present. Our work serves as an introduction to the seven other articles in this special issue, which consider the twentieth-century evolution of higher education politics and policies in Canada, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and USSR/Russia.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Higher EducationSame topicHigher Education Governance and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207