Le campus universitaire satellite comme stratégie territoriale : discours politiques et institutionnels de la marge métropolitaine au Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
De récentes analyses critiques de l'université en tant qu'acteur urbain ont identifié la compétition interurbaine et les concepts d'attractivité métropolitaine comme des composantes importantes des relations contemporaines entre la ville et l’université. Malgré leur importance croissante les géographies globales et locales de l'enseignement supérieur, les campus satellites – sites d'activité universitaire délocalisés – attirent peu d'attention dans ces débats, notamment dans les contextes péri-métropolitains. Sous le regard de l’accessibilité aux études, les campus satellites échappent également aux conceptualisations de leurs impacts sociospatiaux. Emblématique de la restructuration spatiale, opérationnelle et discursive de l’université, nous démontrons que la relocalisation universitaire représente pourtant un site d’observation des espaces relationnels changeants entre les « centres » urbains et leurs « périphéries ». À travers l'étude de cas d'un processus consultatif pour un nouveau campus satellite dans Lanaudière, ce mémoire explore les dynamiques et les tensions de la relocalisation universitaire. Comment les acteurs politiques et institutionnels construisent-ils l’espace « post-métropolitain » (Soja, 2011) et avec quelles implications pour la géographie régionale de l’enseignement supérieur ? À partir d’entretiens semi-structurés avec des acteurs politiques, d’instances de gouvernance et du milieu universitaire, la recherche théorise une dimension réputationnelle des campus satellites qui découle d’un imaginaire spatial dominant de commercialisation du savoir et du développement urbain. Ces conceptions sous-tendent la fragmentation des visions régionales de la présence universitaire et participent à une hybridation fonctionnelle et symbolique de la territorialité urbaine entre régionalité et métropole. Ce faisant, le campus satellite apparaît non seulement comme un instrument de déploiement universitaire, mais comme un révélateur actif des recompositions spatiales à l’oeuvre. Recent critical analyses of the university as an urban actor have identified interurban competition and concepts of metropolitan attractiveness as important components of contemporary city university relations. Despite their growing importance in the global and local geographies of higher education, satellite campuses—sites of delocalized university activity—receive little attention in these debates, particularly in peri-metropolitan contexts. Satellite campuses also escape conceptualizations of their sociospatial impacts under overarching accessibility discourses. Emblematic of the spatial, operational, and discursive restructuring of the university, we demonstrate that university reterritorialization nevertheless represents a site for observing the changing relational spaces between urban "centers" and their "peripheries." Through the case study of a consultative process for a new satellite campus in Lanaudière, this thesis explores the dynamics and tensions of university reterritorialization. How do political and institutional actors construct the "post-metropolitan" space (Soja, 2011) and with what implications for the regional geography of higher education? Based on semi-structured interviews with political actors, governance stakeholders, and university representatives, the research theorizes a reputational dimension of satellite campuses that stems from a dominant spatial imaginary of knowledge commercialization and urban development. These conceptions underlie the fragmentation of regional visions of the university presence and contribute to a functional and symbolic hybridization of urban territoriality between regionality and metropolis. In doing so, the satellite campus appears not only as an instrument of university deployment but also as an active revealer of the spatial recompositions at work.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".