Dreaming the life: international students and the temporal complexity of employability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Undergraduates today are required to make strategic decisions about where and what they study, and how they allocate time to studies, extra-curricular activities, and work.International students are likely to experience the pressure to capitalize on their time more intensely because of the high cost of their degree, the work required to acculturate, and the uncertainty of mobility aspirations.Drawing on multi-modal, longitudinal data from a small, diverse group of working international undergraduates at a Canadian university, this article examines how they respond to pressures to be planful, employable and productive.We find that students' lived experiences contradict idealized discourses of youth mobility.While they feel pressure to make the most of opportunities, the cost of intensive work and constraints on choices are apparent.The effort required to acculturate makes it difficult for such students to be efficient in their use of time.Finally, attempting to keep mobility options open in multiple sites that are constantly changing requires that they invest a significant amount of time and energy.Socio-demographic differences and mobility histories influence students' ability to choose and their experiences of term-time work, as well as their ideas about what constitutes an appreciable life.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".