MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6959557411 · doi:10.11575/prism/43190

Internationalization in the Formal Curriculum as Interpreted and Experienced by International Graduate Students in Canada – An Interpretive Case Study

2024· other· en· W6959557411 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant pathogens and resistance mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternationalizationCurriculumReflexivityInternational educationThematic analysisRealmQualitative researchStudy abroadHigher education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many universities in Canada have dedicated themselves to internationalization as an educational approach to enhance students’ awareness of global complexities, engage with diversity, foster global citizenship, and encourage meaningful contributions to society. Despite the growing attention to modifying curricula to align with the internationalization agenda, the literature offering guidance on approaching this endeavour remains limited, particularly concerning insights from students and within the specific academic realm of education. In order to contribute to the ongoing discourse surrounding curriculum internationalization, deepen the comprehension of how recent international students interpret and experience this approach, and explore ways to enrich student learning experiences, I conducted an interpretive case study, the details of which are presented in this dissertation. Specifically, I delved into a case study centred on internationalization in the formal curriculum through the perspectives of international graduate students enrolled in a school of education at a comprehensive academic and research university in Canada. Using qualitative content analysis and reflexive thematic analysis, I analyzed data collected from public documents, semi-structured interviews with nine international graduate students, and my reflexive research journal. Guided by the framework of practice architecture theory, I identified and shared interpretations on four key themes: 1. Influential cultural-discursive arrangements in shaping interpretations; 2. Diversification of course content: The deliberate commencement; 3. Advancing inclusion in course design to mitigate inequalities; 4. Crucial social-political arrangements in facilitating intercultural learning. In dialogue with existing scholarship, my findings elaborate on the meanings and value of content integration in an ‘internationalized’ formal curriculum, as some international graduate students interpreted. The research findings also highlight the importance of being aware of the practice traditions on the site and incorporating inclusive course design to mitigate inequalities and the risk of system exclusion in an internationalized formal curriculum. Furthermore, the findings suggest that institutional discussions on diversity and inclusivity are notably influential in shaping how international graduate students interpret an internationalized curriculum. In addition, as my findings revealed, being aware of the hierarchical structure within a university and understanding the power dynamics between instructors and students can potentially lead international graduate students to perceive instructors as the primary initiators of the course internationalization process. Simultaneously, they tend to predominantly view their role as that of responsive participants. The study seeks to contribute to empirical and practical knowledge on international studies of internationalizing the formal curriculum in higher education. It shows the necessity for more recent, in-depth, and regional-specific studies regarding curriculum internationalization from students’ perspectives. It concludes by offering recommendations for higher education institutions to support curriculum internationalization.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.824

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.008
Science and technology studies0.0420.036
Scholarly communication0.0180.004
Open science0.0050.011
Research integrity0.0040.008
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicPlant pathogens and resistance mechanismsFrench-language works237,207