MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3041599522 · doi:10.37870/joqie.v2i2.106

Recrutement, accueil et intégration des étudiants internationaux

2011· article· fr· W3041599522 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Abderrahman Hassi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Quality in Education · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesSociologyPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Avec l'avènement de la révolution du monde de l'information, l'enseignement est apparu comme un facteur déterminant d'épanouissement et de prospérité pour les sociétés et, du même fait, comme une condition d'harmonie entre les pays. Une telle conviction est appuyée par la mondialisation des économies et la création de regroupements de marchés régionaux.Sans nul doute, la présence des étudiants internationaux sur les campus universitaires est fructueuse aussi bien pour l'université d'accueil que pour les étudiants locaux, en raison de la diversité culturelle, du rayonnement institutionnel et des retombées économiques.Dês lors un vaste questionnement émerge : o๠se positionne l'Université du Québec à Chicoutimi et la région du Saguenay-Lac-St-Jean par rapport à la mobilité des étudiants internationaux ?L'étude s'est proposée, dans un premier temps, d'examiner le processus de recrutement, d'accueil et d'intégration des étudiants internationaux à l'université ainsi que dans la région susmentionnée et, dans un second temps, d'élaborer des stratégies dans le dessein d'augmenter l'effectif de cette catégorie d'étudiants et de faciliter leur intégration académique, sociale et professionnelle.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.287
Threshold uncertainty score0.571

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0150.008
Scholarly communication0.0100.004
Open science0.0020.010
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.002

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 head0.172
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Quality in EducationSame topicSecond Language Learning and TeachingFrench-language works237,207