Academic Integrity Across Time and Place: Higher Education’s Questionable Moral Calling
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
Abstract In this chapter, I call on Canada’s higher education institutions to embrace Veritas (truth), in every aspect of the academy. Academic integrity must transcend discussions of student misconduct and apply to all that we are—our history, our research, our curriculum, our pedagogy, our purpose. Tracing Western higher education’s development from medieval times in Europe, through to the US and Canada, I make the case that the academy has paradoxically been both a dominating and liberating force since its inception. While imposing Western conceptions of morality and truth that have shifted over time, and supporting the imperialist ambitions of Church, monarchy and state, higher education has also elevated its graduates to positions of influence within society and advanced national aims. Despite credos of truth telling and missions of character development, higher education’s moral calling has been—and remains—highly questionable. Given the complex challenges the world is facing today, and the need for Canadian institutions of higher learning to confront their colonial roots, it is time for us to critically examine this history and explicitly (re)position integrity at the core of Canada’s higher education institutions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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