"You Can't Be Outside Without Being Part of the Culture": Recommendations for Using Outdoor Recreation to Support International Student Transitions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
International students can face linguistic, social, mental and physical challenges (Zhang and Zhou 2010). The findings of a sequential qualitative dominant mixed methodology study, including a survey and three-stage guided walk interviews, position the unique benefits of outdoor recreation as a tool to support cross-cultural transitions. Outdoor recreation benefits include physical and mental health well-being, reduced anxiety, increased social participation, and cultural exchange (Stodolska 2015; Weng and Chiang 2014). To guide universities in stimulating positive international student experiences in the outdoors, the researchers offer recommendations for the integration of outdoor recreation in six phases: (a) recruitment, (b) preparation, (c) orientation, (d) planning, (e) delivery, and (f) evaluation.
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 | 0.015 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.004 |
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".