MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3038082852 · doi:10.1177/2347631120930838

From Enrolment Rates to Collaborative Knowledge Production: A Critique to the Internationalization of Higher Education in Canada

2020· article· en· W3038082852 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rebeca Heringer

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher Education for the Future · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Governance and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternationalizationKnowledge productionSociologyProduction (economics)Internationalization of Higher EducationPhenomenonAsset (computer security)Value (mathematics)PedagogyHigher educationMulticulturalismProcess (computing)Diversity (politics)Public relationsPolitical scienceEngineering ethicsBusinessKnowledge managementEpistemologyEconomicsComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although not a new phenomenon, the evolvement, range and characteristics of the modern process of internationalization are worthy of attention. Despite many potential benefits of having a multicultural campus, internationalizing higher education requires more than the physical presence of international students. As stated on the literature, this process must value transnational knowledge as an asset to the educational experience, thus promoting collaborative knowledge production between teachers and students. Nonetheless, there is a paucity of studies done from the point of view of educators depicting how they perceive their graduate international students and internationalization itself. Therefore, through the perspectives of 10 professors at a mid-sized western Canadian university, this critical phenomenological research offers an analysis of the present condition of higher education in Canada. More specifically, this paper deconstructs some of the challenges of internationalization, in which graduates are to be recognized as active agents of circulation and production of knowledge and not just mere figures or passive recipients of information. Finally, questions about the complexity of incorporating epistemic diversity in a meaningful way through internationalization are proposed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.878
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.327 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher Education for the FutureSame topicHigher Education Governance and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207