Applying a Structural and Representational Intersectional Perspective to Explore the Challenges International Students Face in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The presence of international students on Canadian campuses is often touted as beneficial to the university from both an economic and cultural standpoint. Yet the policies governing international student experiences in Canada scarcely consider how international students experience, understand, and negotiate their university experience. Most studies on the experiences of international students have focused on the individual without analysing how wider social structures and representations inform those experiences. This paper explores the experiences of international students from a macro perspective, utilizing structural and representational intersectional frameworks. Initial findings from this research reveal that the policies governing international students may converge in ways that negatively affect their experiences. A critical discourse analysis (CDA) of the representations of international and Canadian students suggests international students are depicted one-dimensionally, which positions them at a deficit. This research is useful for moving away from an exclusively student-centred approach to investigating international student experiences. It instead examines and challenges how wider systemic factors subordinate international students.
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 | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.049 | 0.034 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.025 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".