MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413298786 · doi:10.32674/2w641h08

International student motivations and experiences of studying in small to mid-sized universities in remote Canada

2025· article· en· W4413298786 on OpenAlexaffabout
Xuechen Yuan, Osagie Okonufua, Muhammad Abid Hussain Kiani

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of International Students · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Student and Expatriate Challenges
Canadian institutionsBrock UniversityUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHigher educationPedagogyPsychologySociologyPublic relationsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada is undergoing significant changes in its immigration policies to reduce the number of study permits and educational pathways for immigration; thus, understanding the realities of small- to mid-sized universities in remote regions potentially affected by this shift is imperative. However, international student motivations and experiences in these contexts remain underexplored in the literature. This scoping review investigates 21 English-language studies conducted in Canadian universities with student enrollment under 20,000, which examine international students’ push‒pull dynamics, lived experiences, and postgraduate retention. Key pull factors include postgraduate immigration pathways, English and cultural immersion, perceptions of safety and affordability, and inclusive school admission; meanwhile, academic pressure, parental expectations, and career-related concerns are major push factors. For lived experiences, recurring themes emerged, encompassing areas such as cultural adjustment, social attachment, language learning, institutional support, and systemic challenges—all of which shape decisions to remain or relocate after graduation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score0.458

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0100.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of International StudentsSame topicInternational Student and Expatriate ChallengesFrench-language works237,207