Academics with disabilities during transformation to a New African University in South Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The idea of transformation to a ‘new African university’ has become topical in contemporary African education scholarship. Whilst it is claimed that the process seeks to include all stakeholders, academics with disabilities are excluded because of discourses and dynamics in Africa’s higher education that have remained deeply embedded in Eurocentric thinking and mind-set. This paper applied Critical Disability Theory to analyse the challenges that face academics with disabilities in the areas of teaching, research, community engagement and doctoral supervision in South African higher education and that must be appropriately and adequately addressed for a successful transformation to a “‘new’ African University”. Data were collected through an analysis of South African literature on exclusion of students with disabilities as research, community engagement and supervision are regarded as a continuum and involve both students and the academics. Findings revealed that academics with disabilities are confronted with specific challenges similar to those faced by students with disabilities, as they all function within the same context during transformation to a ‘new African university’. The challenges are inaccessible physical environment, negative attitudes from the community members, impairment-related disadvantages, lack of adequate funding and lack of adequate media for use, which all compound to limit their functioning like their able-bodied counterparts. Including the voice of academics with disabilities in disability policy was proposed as a way to alleviate the challenges they confront enabling them to contribute positively to scholarship and thus affirm the transformation to a new African University
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".