Examining Internationalization in a Canadian Post-Secondary Institution: Chinese International Students’ Perceptions of a Pathway Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the number of international students at the post-secondary level in Canada increases, Canadian institutions are implementing a range of English language pathway programs to help accommodate these students in transition. However, research suggests these students continue to experience linguistic and social challenges to academic and social integration once in their degree programs. It may be particularly important to explore the unique challenges experienced by pathway students through the lens of the Chinese international student, since they are one of the largest international student populations attending Canadian post-secondary institutions. This exploratory qualitative interview study examines the life and learning experiences of Chinese international students in a pathway program at a Canadian post-secondary institution. Through thematic analysis of semi-structured, in-depth interviews with pathway students and instructors, the study finds that autonomous learning posed a significant challenge to students, due in part to the differences in educational approaches in China and Canada. Furthermore, the shift to online learning during COVID-19 impacted typical acculturation processes and student engagement, though how these participants perceived engagement differed. Finally, students’ perceived lack of language proficiency impacted the quality of their relationships in the Canadian postsecondary context. This study offers recommendations for pathway program instructors and administrators and concludes with directions for future research. 随着加拿大高等教育国际学生数量的增加，加拿大机构正在实施一系列英语语言衔接课程，以帮助适应这些过渡时期的学生。 然而，研究表明，这些学生一旦进入学位课程，就会继续面临学术和社会融合方面的语言和社会挑战。 从中国国际学生的角度探讨衔接学生所经历的独特挑战可能尤为重要，因为他们是加拿大高等教育机构最大的国际学生群体之一。 这项探索性定性访谈研究考察了中国国际学生在加拿大高等教育机构就读衔接课程的生活和学习经历。 通过对预科学生和教师进行半结构化、深入访谈的主题分析，研究发现自主学习对学生构成了重大挑战，部分原因是中国和加拿大教育方法的差异。 此外，COVID-19 期间向在线学习的转变影响了典型的文化适应过程和学生的参与度，尽管这些参与者对参与度的看法有所不同。 最后，学生认为缺乏语言能力影响了他们在加拿大高等教育环境中的人际关系质量。 这项研究为衔接课程讲师和管理人员提供了建议，并以未来研究的方向作为结论。
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".