International science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) students : 4th report of session 2013-14 report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________The worldwide competition to attract the very best Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) students is increasing.Higher education institutions (HEIs) across the globe are constantly striving to improve their offer and attract the best STEM students to their campuses.In particular, countries such as Australia, the USA and Canada are working hard and successfully to attract students.Attracting able STEM students from overseas is of vital importance to UK HEIs, domestic students and UK plc.International students (students from outside the European Economic Area) enrich the experience of domestic students, can provide skills needed for the growth and future of the UK economy and also help to cast the UK in a good light when they return to their country of origin-contributing to the UK's 'soft power'.Moreover, they contribute very significantly to university finances, often partly subsidising courses for domestic students, and they even sustain some courses of importance to the UK that would not be viable without their participation.The number of international STEM students choosing to study in the UK has fallen over recent years (by 8% in 2011/12 and a further 2% in 2012/13) and the total number across all disciplines fell by 1% in 2012/13.A variety of factors may contribute to this decline, and it is difficult to tease out the motivations of prospective international students with any great certainty.Nevertheless, the evidence we received in this inquiry suggested that changes to the immigration rules may well be deterring students from choosing to study in the UK.In particular, there has been a collapse in the number of Indian STEM students choosing to come and study in the UK (down by 38% in 2011/12 and a further 28% in 2012/13).It was put to us on numerous occasions that it was not the immigration rules as such that were deterring students, but their perception of the rules as a result of overblown rhetoric from Ministers and sometimes inflammatory media coverage in the UK and in overseas countries.The UK was seen as a destination that was unwelcoming to some international students.Social media were identified as one reason why negative images could now spread very rapidly.For young, inexperienced students, perception of a situation is key, and we would support all efforts to try and bring some more balance and consistency of messages to a debate which is often polarised and devoid of nuance.The extensive evidence we received, however, pointed to difficulties beyond simply those of perception, difficulties with some of the rules themselves, their complexity and instability.The UK's offer to prospective international students remains a good one; it is founded on academic excellence, but it has been diminished by perceived and real barriers so that the overall offer is not as competitive as it needs to be.Above all, we are concerned that Government policy is contradictory.The Government are simultaneously committed to reducing net migration and attracting increasing numbers of international students (15-20% over the next five years).This contradiction could be resolved if the Government removed students from the net migration figures.Students comprise a majority of non-EU immigrants, so it follows that the net migration target can only be met by reducing the number of international students coming to the UK-contrary to the Government's stated policy to grow numbers of international students.Despite repeated invitations, however, the Government have refused to remove students
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".