Developing Global-Ready Graduates: The CANEU-COOP Experience.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Post-secondary institutions spend considerable resources on programs, such as study abroad and international workintegrated learning, which involve students' participation in international experiences. One significant impetus for these programs is the hope that through exposing students to international settings these students will be better prepared to be successful in global workplaces upon graduation, in essence be more 'global-ready'. However, simply having an international experience does not necessarily lead to the development of capabilities that result in global workplace success. In addition to the knowledge, skills and abilities required for any workplace, being successful in these global workplaces also requires intercultural effectiveness. This paper presents the findings of a study that examined the development of cultural intelligence (CQ), the ability to be effective in intercultural encounters, in students participating in a Canadian-European exchange program (CANEU-COOP) where the European students had a study term in Canada and the Canadian students had a co-op work term in Europe. The study found that while both groups of students developed CQ, there were differences between the groups. These findings reaffirm the importance of intentionally structuring international experiences to include curriculum about and assessment of intercultural effectiveness.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".