[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-600429-105":3,"doc-detail-600429-en":85,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":103},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":78,"head_meta":80,"extra_data":82,"updated_unix":84},105,"en","current-issues-in-comparative-education-cice-volume-26-issue-1-winter-2024","Current Issues in Comparative Education (CICE) - Volume 26 - Issue 1 - Winter 2024","","Study examining inequities in public scholarship during the Covid-19 pandemic, focusing on who issued predictions about the future of higher education and how accurate those claims were. Uses an original dataset of 91 distinct predictions from 22 authors across 31 texts over March 2020 to October 2021. Finds predictions concentrated in op-eds by senior white men in higher education trade journals; over half were not evaluable long after publication. Determinable outcomes proved accurate 83%. Highlights under-representation of women and people of color and proposes equity-focused improvements.",{"@graph":14,"@context":77},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/current-issues-in-comparative-education-cice-volume-26-issue-1-winter-2024/600429/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/current-issues-in-comparative-education-cice-volume-26-issue-1-winter-2024/600429.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"OmBimo","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",5,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69,73],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What is the main research question of the paper?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"The paper asks who makes predictions about higher education during the Covid-19 pandemic, where they publish those predictions, what topics they address, and how accurate the predictions are.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How is the study’s dataset constructed?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"It draws on an original dataset of 91 distinct predictions issued by 22 authors in 31 separate texts spanning March 2020 to October 2021.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"What does the paper find about the accuracy and evaluability of predictions?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"More than half of the predictions could not be evaluated a year or more after first being issued. When outcomes were determinable, predictions were correct at an 83 percent rate.",{"name":74,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":75},"How does the paper address representation and equity among predictors?",{"text":76,"@type":64},"Women and people of color are significantly under-represented among predictors, and the authors conclude that this limits the quality of information the public receives, offering suggestions to improve equity and performance.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":79,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":81,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":83,"site_id":7},600429,1792210829,{"code":4,"msg":86,"data":87},"success",{"doc_id":83,"user_id":88,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":89,"doc_module":4,"category_id":90,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":91,"file_id":92,"file_url":93,"file_type":94,"file_size":95,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":96,"language":97,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":98,"faqs":99,"seo_title":100,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":101,"read_time":102},962090893581,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_276721f389ce27ea32af1340a28f341c",8,"Current Issues in Comparative Education (CICE), Volume 26, Issue 1, Winter 2024  \nInequities in Public Scholarship during the Pandemic: Who Made Predictions about the Future of Higher  \nEducation?  \nKyle Long  \nAmerican University in Dubai  \nBernhard Streitwieser  \nGeorge Washington University  \nJoy Gitter  \nHanover Research  \nThroughout the Covid-19 pandemic, commentators in broadly accessible media have offered a surfeit of predictions about the future of higher education. Due to the absence of accountability mechanisms, however, the accuracy of these claims has been heretofore unknown. Research shows that op-eds and other forms of public scholarship influence public policy, heightening the significance of predictions. This paper asks who makes predictions about higher education, in what venues they issue them, on what topics they make predictions, and how accurate they are. It answers these questions by drawing from an original data set of 91 distinct predictions issued by 22 unique authors in 31 separate texts across a 19-month time span from March 2020 to October 2021. It finds that predictions most often appeared in op-eds written by senior academic white men in higher education trade journals. More than half of predictions could not be evaluated a year or more after they were first issued. Still, predictions with determinable outcomes tended to bear out accurately. Enrollment patterns and teaching modalities were the most common topics. Women and people of color were significantly under-represented among predictors. The paper concludes with suggestions for improving equity and performance.  \nKeywords: Covid; academics; women; people of color; representation.  \nIntroduction  \nScholarship during the Covid-19 pandemic yielded a glut of predictions about the future of higher education. In national news outlets, domestic and international trade publications, and blogs, experts and non-experts alike forecasted a wide range of changes in the sector. They prognosticated on how the pandemic would impact enrollment, mobility, and modality as well as financing, technology, and curricula. Yet it is unclear which and how many from this dizzying array of predictions were hitting the mark. When communicating with the public, academics experience considerably fewer accountability measures than when they communicate with peers in scholarly journals (Posner, 2001) . Indeed, even evaluation of publicly espoused predictions is rare. When it does occur, the results are superficial, providing only a high-level account of general themes (June & O’Leary, 2021), not specific predictions from individual authors.  \nThe absence of rigorous evaluation of publicly issued predictions is a problem for three reasons. First, pandemic-inspired predictions have turned out to be wrong in many  \n© 2024, Current Issues in Comparative Education, Teachers College, Columbia University.  \nALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Current Issues in Comparative Education 26(1), 3-28.  \nLong, Streitwieser & Gitter  \ndomains, from housing to jobs to state budgets (Demsas, 2022) . We should not expect different results in the higher education sector. Second, inaccurate predictions can still influence public policy. While earlier scholars doubted the impact of academic discourse on public opinion and public policy (Posner, 2001), more recent research has shown that scholars can indeed move the needle when communicating with the public through opeds (Coppock et al., 2018) . Third, without measurement, there can be no improvement. Higher education commentators can better serve the public by reflecting on their predictive performance.  \nOur paper identifies and analyzes predictors and their predictions about higher education made during the first year and a half of the Covid-19 pandemic in the United States. While journalists, policy analysts, and junior academics, among others, also offer predictions, we find that prediction-making is generally a pursuit of senior academic white men. They t","cbCaicHRuSnYhG99","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaicHRuSnYhG99","pdf",312192,26,"English","# Inequities in Public Scholarship during the Pandemic\n## Introduction\n## Literature Review","[{\"question\":\"What is the main research question of the paper?\",\"answer\":\"The paper asks who makes predictions about higher education during the Covid-19 pandemic, where they publish those predictions, what topics they address, and how accurate the predictions are.\"},{\"question\":\"How is the study’s dataset constructed?\",\"answer\":\"It draws on an original dataset of 91 distinct predictions issued by 22 authors in 31 separate texts spanning March 2020 to October 2021.\"},{\"question\":\"What does the paper find about the accuracy and evaluability of predictions?\",\"answer\":\"More than half of the predictions could not be evaluated a year or more after first being issued. When outcomes were determinable, predictions were correct at an 83 percent rate.\"},{\"question\":\"How does the paper address representation and equity among predictors?\",\"answer\":\"Women and people of color are significantly under-represented among predictors, and the authors conclude that this limits the quality of information the public receives, offering suggestions to improve equity and performance.\"}]","Current Issues in Comparative Education (CICE) - Volume 26 - Issue 1 - Winter 2024 | PDF",1792090674,66,{"code":4,"msg":86,"data":104},[105,109,113,117,121,126,131,134,139,142,146],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":106,"show_sort_weight":107,"slug":108},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":110,"show_sort_weight":111,"slug":112},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":114,"show_sort_weight":115,"slug":116},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":118,"show_sort_weight":119,"slug":120},"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":122,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":123,"show_sort_weight":124,"slug":125},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":129,"slug":130},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":90,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":132,"slug":133},30,"research-report",{"id":135,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":136,"show_sort_weight":137,"slug":138},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":137,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":140,"show_sort_weight":137,"slug":141},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":143,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":144,"show_sort_weight":143,"slug":145},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":147,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":148,"show_sort_weight":55,"slug":149},19,"General","general"]