MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3081846900 · doi:10.20396/etd.v22i3.8659365

Internationalization as a process of change

2020· article· en· W3081846900 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cláudia Schiedeck Soares de Souza, María Julieta Abba, Danilo R. Streck

Bibliographic record

VenueETD - Educação Temática Digital · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternationalizationKnightFutures contractHigher educationInternationalization of Higher EducationSociologyPolitical scienceDiversity (politics)Process (computing)Public relationsBusinessComputer scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article features an interview with Jane Knight, professor at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE-University of Toronto), held in June 2019, during the event “Shaping Sustainable Futures for Internationalization in Higher Education”, where Professor Knight was among the main speakers. Internationally recognized for being one of the first authors to define the internationalization of Higher Education theoretically, Jane Knight reflects on this definition after 25 years. In this interview, she also talks about the diversity of institutions in the educational scenario that develops internationalization programs, with particular attention to the international program and provider mobility (IPPM). She highlights as well some relevant and inspiring experiences, such as the one she promoted in the African continent. Finally, she reflects on some challenges of research in internationalization, highlighting the need for interdisciplinary investigations based on evidence on different dimensions of Higher Education.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0110.090
Scholarly communication0.0180.017
Open science0.0020.018
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueETD - Educação Temática DigitalSame topicSecond Language Learning and TeachingFrench-language works237,207