The Transnational Ties that Bind: Relationship Considerations for Graduating International Science and Engineering Research Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The last decade has witnessed a significant rise in scholarly and policy attention paid to the migration and career decisions of international (post)graduate research students, particularly those in science, technology, engineering and mathematics disciplines. Considered by many governments as important contributors to national science and innovation agendas, as well as potential members of an educated labour force, several states have implemented strategic regulatory changes to encourage foreign (post)graduate students in these fields to remain after their studies. However, these policies tend to frame such students as free agents able to respond to easing work permit or residency conditions in line with their individual career or lifestyle preferences. This paper advances theorisations of post‐graduation decision making among international students by illustrating the extent to which diverse transnational social ties and personal concerns are highly influential in shaping migration and career strategies. Drawing on in‐depth interviews with foreign students completing science and engineering (post)graduate degrees in London, UK and Toronto, Canada, the paper demonstrates that relationship considerations, such as care for ageing parents, managing dual careers, and future childcare and work‐life balance concerns, are tightly intermingled with graduates' different employment and settlement considerations at this transitional life‐stage. These findings carry wider implications for our understanding of the multiple geographic directions in which students feel pulled upon graduation – challenging traditional push‐pull or stay‐or‐return portrayals. They also underscore the importance of accommodating social reproduction concerns for the production and circulation of a scientific labour force. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".