The Internationalization of Canadian Faculties of Law: Contributions to a Modern Legal Knowledge Economy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
How do law faculties in Canada deal with internationalization in terms of their political economy and knowledge, and how do international students contribute to the circulation and production of legal knowledge? This dissertation draws on the evolution of international student enrollment from 2010 to 2020 and interviews with law professors from the six most internationalized faculties of law in Canada to describe the main features of the internationalization of legal education in the country to answer those questions. The extended case method is applied to amplify the discussions. The populational distribution of international students in faculties of law, compared to universities, points out structuring factors of current models and shows how different the internationalization in law is from the patterns in universities in general. Social situations presented by participants, touching on how they conceptualize internationalization, institutional strategies, relations with international students, circuits of circulation of knowledge, and economic aspects, reveal how the forces of academicism, professionalism, and globalization interact to frame the current internationalization of Canadian law faculties. Based on that, I propose a theoretical reconstruction of the Law and Learning tradition where the analysis of the political economy of legal education focuses on the traits of the ongoing legal knowledge economy. It concludes by claiming that forces of professionalism have led the internationalization of law faculties according to a business model similar to the pre-modern mercantilist economic system, in line with the reproduction of law as a pre-modern discipline. In that system, international students are primarily consumers rather than producers of knowledge within a legal knowledge economy that lacks communication between basic research and the profession. An alternative modern legal knowledge economy is imagined, where a modern legal science is unleashed from formal institutions of practice and international students become valuable assets for innovation both in legal research and practice.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".