Abogados al por mayor: la educación jurídica en Colombia desde una visión comparada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A pesar de la importancia que tiene la educación jurídica en el fortalecimiento del Estado de derecho, en Colombia se ha investigado poco sobre este tema. Este artículo se propone ayudar a remediar ese vacío analizando la educación jurídica colombiana a la luz de los casos de Alemania, Estados Unidos y México. El modelo de educación jurídica alemán se caracteriza por una fuerte regulación estatal; el estadounidense, por los fuertes controles por parte de la profesión, y el mexicano, por la desregulación y el predominio del mercado. Colombia tiende a parecerse a este último modelo. El artículo plantea que la actual educación jurídica colombiana no es una fatalidad, sino el producto de opciones concre- tas que elegimos hace décadas. Esas opciones han sido con frecuencia nocivas, pero son reversibles si aprendemos de las lecciones valiosas de los modelos de otras latitudes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".