School-aged children and decisions for studying abroad in Canada
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine parental and students’ decisions regarding participating in K-12 level study abroad programs in Manitoba, Canada. Design/methodology/approach The study reports on data collected through document analysis and semi-structured interviews with 18 international students and 14 parents. Findings The findings suggest that the key factors influencing decisions are perceptions of enhanced career prospects, changing global environments and broadened post-secondary education choices. Country-specific factors include quality and safety of the learning environment, multiculturalism and reputation associated with the country and people. Research limitations/implications The participants were primarily students and parents from the EU countries associated primarily with horizontal mobility. Experiences of students from the main sending countries (China, South Korea and Japan) might differ. Practical implications The results are relevant to educational managers in designing high-quality international programs and recruitment agents. Originality/value The study adds important empirical evidence to the limited research that has been conducted on study abroad experiences at the K-12 level. It is one of the first in the Canadian context. It provides unique perspectives in USA and Canada comparisons for study abroad of school-aged children.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it