MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378416792 · doi:10.32674/jcihe.v15i2.4738

Investigating the Social and Academic Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on International Students at a Canadian University

2023· article· en· W4378416792 on OpenAlexaffabout
N. Zakharchuk, Jing Xiao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative & International Higher Education · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicEquity (law)SocializationCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Diversity (politics)Political scienceHigher educationPopulationSociologyPublic relationsEconomic growthMedical educationPsychologyMedicineSocial scienceInfectious disease (medical specialty)Economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic posed significant disruptions in traditional educational policies and practices worldwide. The study adopted an equity, diversity, and inclusion lens to investigate the impact of the pandemic on international students in a Canadian university. The findings from data analysis identified challenges and supports for international students in five areas: academic, financial, health and well-being, socialization, and housing and accommodation. There were several gaps between international students’ academic and social needs during the pandemic and the institutional support. While the university prioritized supports in the academic domain, international students identified social challenges as more significant during the pandemic. The gap was also evident in communicating institutional support to students, as some students were not aware of the spectrum of institutional services. Finally, there was a need for more targeted support for international students. The pandemic called for more fundamental and comprehensive actions to support the diverse student population.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.244
GPT teacher head0.549
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative & International Higher EducationSame topicCOVID-19 and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207