Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: This small‐scale interpretive study explores Japanese young women who quit decent jobs and invest large amounts of money to travel and study in Canadian English language programmes for substantial lengths of time without future plans of career advancement through their overseas learning experience. The first part of the study explicates the Japanese societal and corporate culture, where those women come from and plan to return, and suggests that the supposed beneficial effects of TOEIC, English skills and overseas study experience on professional opportunities are implicitly restricted to the prospective and current managerial staff, predominantly men, who are already in good standing regardless of their English levels. In‐depth interviews were conducted with three formerly employed women, complemented by descriptive statistics on another 22 women who responded to a questionnaire. This study demonstrates that the contextualized perspective of those women allows for a better understanding of the surface contradiction between the informants' decision to quit jobs and current commitment to overseas study, on the one hand, and on the other their low motivation for autonomous long‐term English study in the past and in the future, current beginner‐level English proficiency, and limited expectations for professional advancement through overseas study experience upon return home.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".