Mapping academic practice: a Latourian inquiry into a set of lecture slides
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
How is academic work accomplished within a curriculum that has been established through a digital education infrastructure, and what, exactly, does an academic member of staff do within this digital context? Reflecting on the empirical findings of a three-year ethnography of a distributed medical education curriculum delivered across two university campuses in Canada, this paper demonstrates that the ways in which work that has typically been characterized as academic is enacted within this curriculum, positioned as a socio-technological network, through a heterogeneous network of people and materials. Drawing on the philosophical anthropology of Bruno Latour, An Inquiry into Modes of Existence, this paper positions the individual academic member of staff as one amongst many network elements within the digital platform across which academic work is generated and circulated. The paper argues that studies of digitally-mediated higher education can equally rest on small and localized instances of practice as well as on cross-boundary or institutional explorations, and offers ways of thinking that are informed by Latour's philosophical anthropology.
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 | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it