Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper draws from the author’s experience of developing a short-term intensive international learning experience within the framework of a one-semester course. The paper is aimed at faculty members who are interested in implementing a short but effective and authentic international learning opportunity, but who may not have expertise in issues surrounding international development and learning abroad. It addresses some of the challenges, successes, and lessons learned, such as working with an appropriate international partner, overcoming barriers to student participation, ensuring discipline-specific learning, and providing the appropriate context of international development issues within the time-frame of a single semester.
 
 Nous nous fondons ici sur notre propre expérience d’élaboration d’une situation d’apprentissage internationale, intensive et à court terme, dans le cadre d’un cours d’un seul semestre. Cet article est destiné aux enseignants qui, sans nécessairement posséder une expertise en matière de développement internationale et d’apprentissage à l’étranger, souhaiteraient mettre en œuvre une expérience d’apprentissage internationale aussi brève qu’efficace et authentique. Nous abordons les difficultés, les réussites et les leçons tirées de l’expérience, comme la nécessité d’un partenaire international adéquat, le dépassement des obstacles à la participation des étudiants, l’apprentissage adapté à des disciplines en particulier, et l’établissement d’un contexte approprié pour les questions de développement international dans le cadre temporel d’un semestre unique.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".