More house on an ever-shakier foundation: An administrator’s perspective on institutional reforms in the context of Christopher Martin’s ideal <i>Right to Higher Education</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper version of the response I offered to Christopher Marin as part of the symposium on The Right to Higher Education at the 2022 North American Association for Philosophy & Education Conference, I present some practical challenges of post-secondary reforms in the context of Martin’s theory of the right to higher education. Specifically, I address Martin’s three jointly necessary distributive conditions – non-exclusion, adequate options and full public funding – as necessary conditions and significant constraints on meaningful reform toward his ideal of higher education within individual institutions in light of resource constraints in the nonideal, real world. I argue that we ought to aim toward fully realizing adults’ right to higher education yet to do so requires restructuring and reprioritizing post-secondary education on systemic scale.
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 | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.040 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.012 | 0.019 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".