International Experience in the Academic Field: Knowledge Production, Symbolic Capital, and Mobility Fetishism
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
Abstract Academic researchers operate in their own labour market, or field, which has its own institutional infrastructure and professional practices that value international experience and mobility. In this paper, we explore if and how academics believe that international experience and mobility provide advantages for knowledge exchange and production and can be considered a symbolic form of capital that signifies value and thus renders them more competitive in the academic field. In addition, we investigate if international mobility is fetishised in the academic field and treated as an asset independent of the context in which it occurs. Results from a qualitative study involving 42 interviews with academic researchers in Canada and Germany show that international experience is valued as a form of capital but that mobility is rarely fetishised. Furthermore, the international academic field is organised hierarchically, with the USA and other English‐speaking countries exerting the greatest value as destinations. Copyright © 2016 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.
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 | 0.000 | 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