The political process of international education: Complementarities and clashes in the Manitoba K-12 sector through a multi-level governance lens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
International education has become a policy sector of growing importance to Canada. With increased government regulations, disconnect is often observed between the intended policy outcomes and practice. This study aims to explain this disconnect by analyzing the heterogeneity among stakeholder interests. It focuses on 1) distribution of authority; 2) heterogeneity of values; and 3) complementarities and clashes in policy issues. A multi-level governance (MLG) framework (Chou et. al., 2017; Hooghe & Marks, 2003), as a guiding theoretical lens, is applied to examine the interactions among governments (federal-provincial), non-governmental organizations, school administrators, international students and their families in the context of the Manitoba K-12 sector. Data for this study were collected through document analysis and 40 semi-structured interviews. Findings indicate increased steering power of both the federal and provincial governments to regulate international education with conflicting agendas based on political ideologies. The pursuit of Canada’s economic competitiveness through K-12 international education has led to a rise in the authority of non-governmental actors, including parents and students, to shape the services, programs and curriculum content offered by public schools. The study proposes adding an additional layer to the MLG framework, that of the complexities within stakeholder groups.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".