MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410774402 · doi:10.5539/ies.v18n3p110

The Evolution of the Internationalization of Higher Education in China

2025· article· en· W4410774402 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yiwei Qiu, Yanshu Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Governance and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternationalizationChinaHigher educationInternationalization of Higher EducationComparative educationMathematics educationInternational educationPedagogyPolitical sciencePsychologySociologyEconomic growthBusinessEconomicsInternational trade

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper delves into the historical trajectory of China’s higher education internationalization since 1840, examining its social context, underlying motivations, policies, and practices across various historical epochs. The focal point of our discussion is the chronological evolution of internationalizing Chinese higher education, substantiated by official statistics and documents. The exploration reveals that China has achieved significant strides, considerably broadening the scope of internationalization in higher education, increasing global communications, and cultivating international students. This study reflects the historical developments, generalizes the challenges and opportunities, and may contribute specialized knowledge to the international educational pool. With the development of globalization, higher education is not an individual issue and has become transnational and transformative. It is meaningful to review the history and create new improvements. The advanced findings in this study not only provide valuable insights into future initiatives but also offer guidance for overseas collaboration providers in formulating pertinent and effective strategic plans for their future collaborations and engagements.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.686
Threshold uncertainty score0.751

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.392 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education StudiesSame topicHigher Education Governance and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207