Academic Freedom in a Plural World : Global Critical Perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>The notion of academic freedom dates back to the creation of universities and has long been understood to be central to their vocation. This freedom has come under attack by different actors throughout its history. In the current context, rising threats to democracy and human liberties, the corporatization of research, concerns about diversity and increased societal polarization, are putting a considerable pressure on its exercise. However, academic freedom is also a concept that suffers from persistent ambiguities associated with the general notion of freedom as well as debates about the function of universities.<br>This edited collection addresses the question of academic freedom by situating it in its broader global context. More conceptual treatments contribute to an understanding of academic freedom as distinct and separate from, although related to, freedom of expression, or student rights. These conceptual treatments are combined with studies of actual struggles over the scope of academic freedom in specific universities. The contributions come from a broad variety of sites seek to deprovincialize the conversation beyond North America or the English-speaking world.</p>
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.017 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.017 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.481 | 0.006 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".