Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The lead article features Shibao Guo's keynote presidential address to the CIESC annual meeting held at the University of British Columbia this past June.Guo invites readers to reflect on the changing nature of comparative and international education in the context of transnational migration.Describing transnational migration as a multidirectional process affecting identities, experiences of belonging, attachment, or exclusion, Guo calls for a more expansive conceptualization of comparative and international education following the realities of immigrant populations who themselves are crossing boundaries of nation, culture, and identity.Authors Jane Knight and Qin Liu present an important review of research on international program and provider mobility (IPPM), a growing, and yet under-researched phenomenon of international higher education.Using a classification framework co-developed by Knight to analyze four different modes of IPPM, the authors review the scholarly literature since 2000 to share some insights on the trends, issues, and challenges related to research on IPPM.One of the findings is the widespread confusion regarding the categorization of international mobility activities.At a time when the issue of equitable access to higher education is being debated widely, Olivier Bégin-Caouette takes up the debate on quality and equality in higher education in the context of social welfare regimes.Using two theoretical frameworks, academic capitalism and welfare regime typology, and interviews with key actors in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden, the author analyzes the indirect relations between equality and research production.This discussion illuminates how the social welfare regime model shapes a possible resolution of the quality-equality trade-off.The article concludes with a three-dimensional model that reflects these relations, and provides insights into the "quality-equality conundrum" in higher education.Another important higher education concern, pedagogical approaches in university settings outside of the Global North, is taken up by authors Charlene VanLeeuwen, Linyuan Guo-Brennan, and Lori Weeks.In their article, "Critical Pedagogy of Discomfort in Community-Based Learning: Kenyan Students' Experiences," they challenge the common practice of employing Eurocentric community-based learning models in the Global South.Informed by Boler's (1999) notion of the pedagogy of discomfort, they argue for the decolonization of community-based learning (CBL) teaching and research, and advance a discussion of what could constitute transformative learning for social justice outcomes through a critical CBL.The research, a doctoral study of the first author, aimed at developing an understanding of the issue through research based in Kenyan universities.Everton Ellis and Edward Thomas take up the somewhat controversial notion of the underachievement of boys, in the context of basic education initiatives such as Education for All (EfA) that emphasize the importance of access to and enrollment in education for girls in poorer countries.Through their research in Jamaica, they highlight some of the issue that influence such initiatives such as the neoliberal restructuring of education, the imposition of global outcomes and standards on local contexts, and the deteriorating quality of education.These lead to the unintended consequence of the ongoing problem of boys' underachievement and state "evasion" of the issue.They call for the "localization" of international education policies.Tremblay, Arapi, Bélanger, Bocchi, Kahn, and Toullec-Théry, authors of our French contribution in this issue, take a comparative look at individualized education plans (IEPs) for students with special needs from five school systems: Quebec, Ontario, France, Belgium (Wallonia), and Switzerland (Ticino canton).Their article sheds light on the terminology,
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».