MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2891229144 · doi:10.1177/1028315318797155

Evaluation of an Online “Internationalization at Home” Course on the Social Contexts of Addiction

2018· article· en· W2891229144 on OpenAlexaffabout
Bonnie K. Lee, Huixiang Cai

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Studies in International Education · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Student and Expatriate Challenges
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternationalizationInternationalization of Higher EducationTransformative learningPublic relationsHigher educationCurriculumMainland ChinaGovernment (linguistics)SociologyInternational educationPedagogyPolitical scienceChinaBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Internationalization of higher education to include international, intercultural, or global components into the delivery of postsecondary education has drawn increasing attention in the last two decades. A globally relevant course focusing on the “Social Contexts of Addiction” engaged students’ online interaction at a Canadian university with learners from across various institutions in mainland China, Macau, and Hong Kong. Although “internationalization at home” (IaH) is one of the most prevalent themes in the internationalization literature, empirical evaluation of its merits along with the challenges of its implementation is still limited. In this article, the authors used student and faculty feedback to identify the design factors of this online IaH course that facilitated its success and transformative benefits. Discussion highlighted several follow-up strategic initiatives to broaden the adoption and conversations on internationalization in teaching, and the necessity of multilevel support and alignments among government, university, and faculty leadership to sustain internationalization efforts across the curriculum.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.302
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.189
GPT teacher head0.512
Teacher spread0.323 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Studies in International EducationSame topicInternational Student and Expatriate ChallengesFrench-language works237,207