MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2909554627 · doi:10.1177/1478210318824254

Internationalization of education as an emerging field? A framing of international education for cross-domain analyses

2019· article· en· W2909554627 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Tarc

Bibliographic record

VenuePolicy Futures in Education · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Education and Multiculturalism
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisionFraming (construction)ConceptualizationSociologyInternationalizationInternational educationNormativeEpistemologyPolitical scienceSocial scienceHigher educationLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The internationalization of education (IE) has accelerated across the past two decades. Although there are now a range of representations and theorizations of IE, they find little connection across domains and levels. Toward bolstering a more coherent field of IE, which translates across distinctive expressions of IE, this paper argues for a conceptual approach that includes theorizing IE’s past and present enabling conditions, motivating visions, significant (operational) obstacles, and ensuing tensions. The main contribution is a conceptualization of late 20th century international education, which historically situates the current 21st century IE movement. This conceptualization is informed primarily by a periodization of the International Baccalaureate that surfaces the semantic contours and structuring tensions of international education as embedded in the shifting historical and socio-political conditions of the last 50 years. Semantically, 20th century international education carries with it literal (educational activities across national jurisdictions) and normative/aspirational significations (liberal-humanist education for making a better world). And the structuring tensions of international education are constituted in the entangling of the normative visions, as “education for international understanding,” with the instrumental agendas, as revenue generation. An emerging IE field can draw on the conceptual framing offered in this paper as a basis for theorizing across the somewhat siloed IE discourses.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0070.045
Scholarly communication0.0220.032
Open science0.0010.010
Research integrity0.0040.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.519
Teacher spread0.480 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations25
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolicy Futures in EducationSame topicGlobal Education and MulticulturalismFrench-language works237,207