MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Importance of undergraduate institution prestige in physics faculty hiring networks

2024· article· en· W4398141864 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Physics Education Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvaluation of Teaching Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPrestigeInstitutionMedical educationMathematics educationPsychologyPedagogySociologyMedicineSocial sciencePhilosophyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reforming the professionalization experiences of future faculty members, including their undergraduate experience, provides a possible means to create scalable change in higher education. However, this requires an understanding of where faculty undergraduate training occurs. We analyze data from 7748 tenure-line faculty members across 611 U.S. physics departments, including their undergraduate alma mater and their employer university. The resulting undergraduate professionalization network reveals a prestige hierarchy similar in strength to those previously found in hiring networks at the Ph.D. level, indicating that the road to faculty jobs begins during undergraduate admissions. Furthermore, 42% of physics faculty members earned their undergraduate degrees from institutions outside of the United States. These results reinforce the importance of institutional prestige in academia and offer a potential strategy for driving systemic change. Published by the American Physical Society 2024

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.465
Threshold uncertainty score0.528

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.345
GPT teacher head0.605
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it