Understanding international and domestic student expectations of peers, faculty and university: Implications for professional communication pedagogy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increasing populations of international students are entering Canadian universities, and instructors of Professional Communication must rapidly adapt to a changing student population. At the studied Maritime Canadian university, numbers of international students increased by 300% between 2009 and 2013. These numbers necessitate a review of our pedagogical approach to ensure student learning, success, and satisfaction in Professional Communication classrooms. Student expectations are linked to their satisfaction and, therefore, retention. We know little about the expectations incoming international students have of the university, their Canadian peers, and their instructors. We also know little about the reciprocal expectations held by domestic students and faculty of these incoming students. By surveying both domestic and international students, we sought to understand their expectations and determine if international student expectations differ from those of their domestic peers and from those of faculty. Understanding student expectations will contribute substantially to our ability to adapt pedagogy, to manage the gap between expectation and satisfaction, to develop appropriate intervention strategies, and to improve retention.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it