Rethinking Curriculum Internationalization: Virtual Exchange as a Means to Attaining Global Competencies, Developing Critical Thinking, and Experiencing Transformative Learning
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
Virtual exchange and collaborative online international learning have emerged as a means to internationalize campuses and foster the development of global competencies among students by facilitating connections with people, organizations, and institutions abroad. Based on a virtual exchange between the U.S. and Thai undergraduate students, this qualitative research used written individual reflection, focus group data, and observations to explore whether U.S. students developed global competencies in the form of ability to communicate and collaborate in a global and multicultural context. Additionally, this study explored whether the focus on the “process” of the collaborative project allowed for the development of critical thinking skills and whether virtual exchange created opportunities for transformative learning. The findings suggest that the U.S. students in this study developed cross-cultural communication and critical thinking skills, an increased awareness and mindfulness of global and cultural dynamics, higher levels of perceived proficiency in global collaboration, and experienced transformative learning as a result of participating in the virtual exchange project.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it