International students’ cultural engagement through constructing distance or proximity
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
International students’ contact and engagement with various cultures has received increased scholarly attention. This scholarship tends to either celebrate students’ cosmopolitanism or highlight their difficulties ‘adapting’ in their receiving countries. In this paper, we examine students’ own perceptions of and engagement with their sending and receiving countries’ cultures through the dialectic of distance and proximity, gleaned from mobilities studies. Based on 20 in-depth online interviews with Vietnamese nationals studying in Vancouver and Paris, our analysis highlights how these students construct or deconstruct notions of distance and proximity between Vietnam and their receiving countries (i.e. France and Canada), as well as between themselves and each of these countries. First, we examine how, before their departure, students cultivate a sense of cultural proximity to their geographically distant countries of destination, through studying and consuming media in French or English. Second, we address students’ rapport with French and Canadian societies as well as their sense of proximity to or distance from Vietnamese culture while studying in France and Canada. We examine how these (de-)constructions of distance can be related to students’ cosmopolitanism. We argue that notions of distance and proximity help foster a nuanced understanding of international students’ mobilities and cosmopolitanism.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it