MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7099748336

Internationalization at Canadian Universities: Progress and Challenges

2007· article· en· W7099748336 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicGroundwater and Watershed Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternationalizationHigher educationState (computer science)Service (business)International educationInternationalization of Higher Education
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The world-wide demand for international education continues to grow and Canadian universities are rising to meet this need. The rationales for internationalization are many and are culturally, politically, academically, and economically based. An overview of the current state of internationalization, its initiatives and programs at Canadian universities is outlined. Some of the challenges of internationalization include a lack of resources and a need for university-wide centralized and collaborative leadership for incoming international students, and study abroad programs. University staff and faculty would benefit from availing themselves of intercultural training provided through their university international offices. Many Canadian universities fully support internationalization in their strategic plans yet have less developed plans of how to implement internationalization into the teaching, support and service dimensions of the university. A case study describes how a mid-sized Catholic affiliated public university college in Ontario is implementing international programs and services

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.880
Threshold uncertainty score0.870

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.011
Science and technology studies0.0220.007
Scholarly communication0.0160.005
Open science0.0040.006
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGroundwater and Watershed AnalysisFrench-language works237,207