Welcoming International and Foreign Students in Canada: Friendly Relations with Overseas Students (<scp>fros</scp>) at the University of Toronto, 1951–68
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One organization particularly dedicated to the understanding and well-being of foreign students in Canada was Friendly Relations with Overseas Students (fros). Active during the 1950s and 1960s, fros became a symbol for Canada to assert its openness and distinctiveness in North America. As an organization focused on counselling, accommodating, and, to some extent, integrating foreign students, fros also built bridges between Canada and the rest of the world. The experience of fros members thus allows us to both deepen our understanding of foreign students’ agency and of the meaning and importance of their transnational experience for both themselves and Canada. In this article, I concentrate on the narrative about cultural exchange forged at fros by both its personnel and students. I propose that what I call the “fros narrative” was a discourse about the integration of foreign students on the University of Toronto’s campus and in the larger Canadian society. It promoted intercultural connections and a form of globalism. It also had a transformative and even redemptive dimension, as it aimed to change people’s worldviews and self-conceptions by abolishing ethnic prejudices.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".