DIVERGENCE BETWEEN RHETORIC AND REALITY OF INTERNATIONALIZATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION OF CANADA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the article is defining the modern challenges of Higher education internationalization concerning gaps between discourses and reality in a global higher education by means of theoretical method of conceptual comparative analysis of current researches concerning HEI process on the example of Canada; conceptual approaches to studying HEI has been outlined the trend of gap appearing between the discourse and reality concerning internationalization at the national and global level. Detailed understanding of real internationalization at practice has been presented. Main challenges of HEI and perspectives of their overcoming in the context of university activity have been defined. Canadian universities chose internationalization as a key priority of strategic planning; it goes out from their official strategic documents. Johnston university outlined project «NGS» (North goes South) as a model of HEI. At the official level the project is outstanding model of HEI and an example for educational institutions. Based on the analysis of M. Larsen research, we have to mention the fact of divergence between official discourse and realities of the program. The divergence was found only after continuing, reflexive process, as authorities always shut down critics of the program. We also can state that the project had unequal relations from the very beginning between the representatives of university, who are considered to be bearers of knowledge and skills, and local partners. Only in some cases, relations reflect partnership. Although in theory international higher education has to provide critical, responsible and engaged inhabitants of the world, at practice it goes about commercialization of research, income generating and formation of international reputation. Key words: higher education internationalization, universities, gaps, challenges, perspectives.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".