MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7084095591 · doi:10.32674/tt8kp072

Curriculum Theory and Pedagogy for Student Mobility: Research and Practice in International Higher Education

2023· book· en· W7084095591 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAgriculture, Water, and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumEquity (law)Higher educationCurriculum theoryWork (physics)Field (mathematics)International educationCurriculum development

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Curriculum Theory and Pedagogy for Student Mobility – an edited collection of international research – seeks to examine how curriculum theory within different social, political, and cultural contexts can be actuated to advance equity and diversity, plus supportive and inclusive outcomes in international student education. A comprehensive volume, it contours a holistic interdisciplinary landscape of the field. The book draws upon both a broad range of curriculum-related theoretical frameworks and multiple perspectives to offer a diverse spectrum of examples about the many challenges and complexities involved in not only theorizing about, but doing the work of, educating international students in institutions of higher education. Additionally, the book provides a strong pedagogical framework for enhanced teaching practices, as well as new avenues for research in international student education. Drawing upon the expertise of contributors from varied backgrounds, identities, fields, and positionalities, the assembled chapters elucidate contemporary curriculum theory and its foundations and uses and analyzes its potential in international education. Equally, theoreticians and practitioners, both, offer valuable insights into conceptualizing, strategizing, and applying curriculum theory-driven research and proven practices for the advancement of the field of international student education.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.276
Threshold uncertainty score0.633

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.397 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAgriculture, Water, and HealthFrench-language works237,207