Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the significant pressures reshaping the contemporary professoriate, particularly the erosion of academic freedom in higher education. The study conducted qualitative interviews with tenured faculty from two Southern Ontario universities to explore how fiscal constraints, administrative overreach, peer dynamics, and technological disruptions (such as generative artificial intelligence) impact faculty roles. Findings reveal that universities are increasingly adopting managerial models prioritizing efficiency and performance metrics over independent intellectual inquiry, a trend participants identified more than a decade ago. This shift, driven by chronic fiscal shortfalls, constrains faculty members’ ability to serve as public intellectuals and undermines universities’ critical societal role. The paper argues that reversing this trend requires structural reforms within universities, including reducing administrative burdens, securing stable public funding, and fostering a culture that values intellectual debate and dissent. Drawing on Deem et al.’s (2007) concept of “new managerialism,” the paper calls for resisting the corporatization of higher education and restoring universities’ focus on advancing knowledge and critical thought. Faculty voices will be silenced without these reforms, jeopardizing the university’s ability to fulfill its mission as a center of independent thought and inquiry.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".