Praise for Islam on <i>Campus: Contested Identities and the Cultures of Higher Education in Britain</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
‘Islam on Campus is a very important and impressive book that will be vital reading for those interested in the civic and public role of universities, decolonisation of the curriculum, the study of Islam within western systems of knowledge, the nature and implications of the reach of the security agenda across public life, and the terms of debate over gender and Islam. Throughout it provides fresh thinking on often stale-mated debates on gender equality, freedom of speech and religious accommodation, and responses to security risks, and in ways that draw on rather than suppress critical debate.’ ‘This ground-breaking work explores the crucial topics of Islamophobia and its impact on Muslim students, and it also explores how the securitisation of Muslims on campus has transformed campus life itself, significantly restricting both freedom of expression and freedom of association. This book will be necessary reading for both sociologists of religion and Islam, and legal and political theorists interested in law and religion in liberal democracies generally.’
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.002 |
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".