Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is no secret that humanities professors find themselves disenchanted by the current state of neoliberal universities; as the story goes, jobs are scarce, enrollment continues to drop, and students seem increasingly disconnected from the value of humanities-based classes. Universities and departments strive for new ways to respond to the current “crisis” in higher education internally, by appealing to the usefulness of the liberal arts, and structurally by institutionalizing the diversity of universities via DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) requirements and offices. On the surface, such measures seem “Deweyan” in spirit, by increasing social diversity, by removing class barriers, and by removing “waste” in the divisions between vocational and humanities studies. However, such responses to neoliberal institutions reproduce the very logic to which they respond and reflect a refusal to think institutionally. Using Dewey’s theories of democracy, growth, and waste, as well as contemporary literatures on the neoliberal university and virtue hoarding in education, we argue that these seemingly Deweyan measures reproduce the problems which they purport to resolve.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".