MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4300617595

NEW GLOBAL MARKET AT HIGHER EDUCATION: AN ANALYSIS FOR INTERNATIONAL STUDENT MOBILITY

2014· article· en· W4300617595 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
İbrahim Çankaya, Engin ÖZTÜRK

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Governance and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceMathematics educationBusinessPsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The number of international students in undergradute or graduate degrees and researchers have globally risen to 4.2 million in 2013 from 2.1 million in 2000 according to OECD figures. Countries are in a fierce competition in order to attract international students in higher education. However neither state, nor private universities in Turkey have common strategies to attract international students. This study aims to compare statistics of Turkey and other OECD on international student mobility, which has become a global market. Data on this study has been gathered by document analysis. In this study, distribution of international students throughout the world, countries hosting the largest number of international students and tuition fees paid by these students, language of education, international student ratio of Turkey and other OECD countries and budget allocated to higher education in other OECD countries and Turkey have been compared respectively. Students from Turkey and other OECD countries usually prefer countries such as USA, Australia, Canada, Britain, Germany, Switzerland, Finland, Sweden, Netherlands and Spain. The reasons of this choice include alternative language courses provided to international students, discounts on tuition fees, higher chance of having a part time job for the students, importance given to distance learning in these countries, higher budget allocated for research and development and better research and development facilities.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.367 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHigher Education Governance and Development→French-language works237,207→