MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7018522660

Educational structures in context: at the interface of higher education

2010· article· en· W7018522660 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueGhent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Education Systems and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHigher educationInstitutionContext (archaeology)GlobalizationBureaucracyDemocracySection (typography)Interface (matter)Further educationAcademic integrity
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The editors have grouped the chapters into three sections, each dealing with more general or more specific issues pertaining to education. The first section introduces chapters that deal with general questions about the existing structures of formal academic education. While the authors adopt a critical approach to the existing structures of formal Higher Education, they seem to agree that the primary role of university in creating and organising the social life, (helped by the personal example and experience of the teacher), not only should not be ignored, but should be reinforced to protect universities against the reigning opportunism, managerialism, and bureaucracy that seem to have been affecting, in various degrees, all modern structures. The second section of the volume focuses on more specific issues concerning Higher Education in different national contexts. While the challenges that Higher Education faces in Canada are different than the challenges it faces in Pakistan or Turkey, the authors agree on one thing: Higher Education should promote the values of democracy and tolerance, prepare students not only for the labour market but also for active citizenship. Historically, universities have been hubs of creativity. In the context of globalisation where national and cultural boundaries are questioned, universities should resume (or keep) their role of facilitators of social change. This entails the need for Higher Education to remain an autonomous social institution and be available to all social groups, including, and especially, the ones whose access to higher education have been traditionally restricted. The third section focuses on the impact of technology, and more specifically, the Internet, on Higher Education. The issues the authors tackle range from the use of Web 2.0 technology to the use of mobile phones and different online platforms during lectures. Despite the very different issues and goals that the authors see with regard to the use of technology in the classroom, they argue along the same lines: the fast access to detailed and voluminous information, and the effective structuring of this information that technology offers, should be incorporated as a useful tool in any classroom, to help the lecturer deliver the material successfully and remain connected to the students (and successfully resolve specific problems that students might face with the course material).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.685
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0070.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.296 · 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