Profiling employers involved in Apprenticeship Trailblazer groups
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This study is the first to analyse the representativeness of apprenticeship Standards Trailblazer groups. Trailblazers set the occupational profile, knowledge, skills and behaviours, and EPAs within apprenticeships. Standards take a long time to develop and representation on them requires a significant organisational commitment. \nThe analysis is based on the employment size and sector of employers represented on Trailblazer groups. \nWhilst the remit of Trailblazers is to represent employers likely to use the apprenticeship, this study has shown that not all Trailblazer groups do. Some Trailblazers have very good sectoral representation and include all of the main sectors that employ the Standard related occupations. Some do not and exclude key sectors some of which employ up to one quarter of related occupations. \nHowever, the main limitation of Trailblazer groups is their over representation of large employers, and their under representation of medium and small employers. This happens on all (for small employers) or most (for medium employers) groups. \nIt is not the case that small and medium sized employers are represented through other organisations. Very few of these organisations are sector or employer representative organisations. Most are training providers or professional/membership bodies. \nA large number of organisations are represented across all of the Trailblazers, 5,589 across the 646 Standards. We estimate that around one in ten are other organisations. Most of these are representative organisations but a similar number are training providers. \nThis study has also shown that a number of employer and other organisations sit on a large number and wide range of Trailblazers. This in itself is not an issue. It can demonstrate the commitment of employers and other organisations to apprenticeships and workforce development. However, this needs to be monitored to ensure that Standards are representative across employers that are likely to use them. \nUndertaking the analysis for this study has been challenging because the data on Trailblazer representation is not organised in any way. There is no information on the sector, employment size, type and geographical spread of organisations. Nor is there any information on the sectoral and size spread of Standard related occupations that could be used to make an assessment of the representativeness of the organisations which sit on the Trailblazers. \nSuch information should be collected as the norm for all organisations that are represented on Trailblazers. In order to assist future analysis, there should be agreement on a basic set of standardised information to be collected about organisations, so their representativeness can be assessed, along with an analysis of the employment profile of Standard related occupations. \n
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,011 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».