MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404843928 · doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2024.102490

Magnets, gatekeepers, surveillants, and refiners: The emergence of higher education institutions as migration governance actors in Australia, Canada, and Germany, 1990 to 2019

2024· article· en· W4404843928 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Lisa Ruth Brunner, Roopa Desai Trilokekar, Simon Morris-Lange, Helen K. Liu, Melissa Laufer, Amira El Masri, Anumoni Joshi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Educational Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Governance and Development
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityYork UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research CouncilSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCorporate governancePolitical sciencePublic administrationBusinessFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• The globally circulating policy discourse ‘ international students are ideal immigrants’ merges three policy arenas: economic immigration, higher education, and international student mobility. This is part of a relatively new edugration (education + [im]migration) policy context in which international students transition to permanent residency status after graduation through targeted immigration pathways. • Edugration has been translated into policy, to varying degrees, across much of the Global North in the 21st century, including Australia, Canada, and Germany. • In this edugration policy context, we argue that higher education institutions now play migration governance roles as magnets, gatekeepers, surveillants, and refiners of future economic immigrants to different degrees in a variety of countries. • These roles are justified by federal governments through a variety of discursive legitimization strategies. However, limited attention has been paid to the imposition of governments’ immigration-focused rationales. • Through a critical discourse analysis of federal government policy documents, we show how the four migration governance roles identified here emerged at different times, yet in relatively similar ways, across Australia, Canada, and Germany. The globally circulating policy discourse ‘ international students are ideal immigrants ’ merges three policy arenas: economic immigration, higher education, and international student mobility. This is part of a relatively new edugration (education + immigration) policy context in which international students transition to permanent residency status after graduation through targeted immigration pathways. We utilize critical discourse analysis to systematically examine select federal policy documents during critical time periods in edugration policy formation across three comparator countries (Australia, Canada, and Germany) from 1990 to 2019. In examining the ripple effect of international student mobility as it intersects with immigration policy, we show the impact of this policy discourse on higher education institutions: in edugration contexts, higher education institutions play new migration governance roles as magnets, gatekeepers, surveillants, and refiners of future economic immigrants. This raises broader questions regarding the long-term implications of international student mobility for university-government relations and the societal roles of higher education institutions more generally.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.419
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.389 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Educational ResearchSame topicHigher Education Governance and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207