(Book Review) Embodying Intercultural Capacities: The Pedagogic Impact of Study Abroad
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Study abroad is often treated as a transformative journey that will automatically give students a new way of seeing the world.Embodying Intercultural Capacities: The Pedagogic Impact of Study Abroad by Kate Naidu asks some critical questions: does studying abroad really help students develop intercultural capacities?If so, how, and under what conditions, do such capacities actually take shape?Drawing on a longitudinal study with Australian students in Indonesia, Naidu (2025) develops the term "interculturalization" (p. 5) to understand the slow and uneven process through which students learn to work on themselves as they navigate cultural differences.She argues that intercultural capacities are not a taken-for-granted by-product of immersion in a host country but are developed through a cumulative pedagogic process that requires active labour of both teaching and learning.This shift offers a critical lens for understanding student mobility, moving beyond what students learn to how their capacities gradually take form.The book is situated within the context of the Australian Consortium for In-Country Indonesian Studies (ACICIS), focusing on Australian university students undertaking semester-long programs in Yogyakarta, Indonesia.This setting represents a trajectory that is much less addressed in the literature on international student mobility where students from developed countries pursue studies in developing countries, including in Asia.After setting out the research landscape in Chapter 1, Chapter 2 addresses the methodological challenge of "capturing the intercultural" (p.21).Naidu tracked 16 undergra-Compte rendu: Liu xvi
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.060 | 0.017 |
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".