New work, old power: inequities within the labor of internationalization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The aim in this paper is to extend Dorothy Smith's conceptual understanding of work to consider the emerging labor of “knowmads” within internationalization of higher education. Through original research on everyday experiences of internationalization, the authors seek to illuminate the ways individuals develop skills and competencies in relation to these new forms of work in order to address the reproduction of inequities. The authors make a connection between internationalization of higher education and knowmadic labor based on the premise that cross‐border education is often pursued in order to develop knowmadic attributes. Design/methodology/approach Through a critical institutional ethnography of one mid‐sized Canadian university, the paper uses survey and interview data gathered from students and faculty ‐ individuals who are involved in knowmadic labor connected to internationalization – to illustrate some of the study participants' daily experiences of internationalization coordinated by the institutional structures of the university in times of globalization. Findings It is concluded that internationalization and connecting new forms of work involved in becoming and producing knowmads not only bypass and disregard present inequities in higher education, but work to reproduce them in new ways. Practical implications The paper provides insight in regards to processes and allocation of work within internationalization, while addressing forms of social inequities that often cut across these practices and concludes with brief comments on the implications of academic knowmadic labor in Western higher education institutions engaged in internationalization. Originality/value While research has been conducted on work in international contexts, little has addressed “the labor” that is involved in becoming knowmads, and that of “producing” knowmads. The paper draws connections between the internationalization of higher education and knowmadic work showing that knowmadic labor is often preceded by knowmadic educational opportunities. The cosmopolitan vision of creating globally aware citizens, with international knowledge, skills, and competencies that institutions espouse, are assumed to be good per se , and to lead to knowmadic qualities and attributes required in a knowmad society. The paper questions these assumptions and the relations of power on which they rest.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".