MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404821066 · doi:10.1108/ijem-09-2023-0439

Decolonizing management education: a bibliometric analysis of Ubuntu

2024· article· en· W4404821066 on OpenAlexaff
Raavee Kadam, George Frempong

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Educational Management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican cultural and philosophical studies
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHigher educationSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The increasing calls to integrate Indigenous perspectives and address the colonial foundations of business schools necessitate a profound shift in educational systems. Such a change mandates a transformation that acknowledges diverse knowledge systems and methodologies, moving beyond the dominant Western paradigms. Design/methodology/approach Our paper introduces the Africentric philosophy of Ubuntu and explores its potential to decolonize management education and support the development of inclusive classrooms. Ubuntu, encapsulated by the notion “I am because you are”, asserts the intrinsic interconnectedness of humanity. Our exploration of Ubuntu includes a bibliometric analysis to map the intellectual structure of Ubuntu within management and educational contexts. Findings We posit that Ubuntu has the potential to offer newer perspectives on personnel and organizational management that are human-centric and emphasize the common good. The results of the bibliometric analysis reveal key publications, influential scholars, institutions and leading journals actively engaged in Ubuntu-centric research along with key research trends. Originality/value This research offers a holistic view of Ubuntu research in the fields of management and education using a bibliometric method.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Other designhigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.895
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.1050.142
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.361 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

Bibliometrics

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designObservational · Other design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Educational ManagementSame topicAfrican cultural and philosophical studiesCategoryBibliometricsFrench-language works237,207