MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Estudo do impacto de um curso MBA em controladoria na evolução de seus egressos

2003· article· pt· W2010311475 on OpenAlexaff
Fábio Frezatti, Sílvia Kassai

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Contabilidade & Finanças · 2003
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicBusiness and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsContinental (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

O ensino de pós-graduação tem evoluído de maneira muito acentuada a partir da premissa que traz conseqüências práticas em termos de benefícios aos participantes e às empresas. A grande busca tem se concentrado nos Master of Business Administration, criação norte-americana do início do século passado, que se expandiu para praticamente todas as partes do mundo. O estudo dos impactos dos cursos tem sido feito nos ambientes profissional e acadêmico. Abordando a evolução dos salários pré e pós MBA, o alcance de novos níveis na carreira e até mesmo a postura e aquisição de competências, os estudos buscam detectar os fatores que determinam o sucesso dos egressos dos cursos. A presente pesquisa examina a população de um programa brasileiro que foi implantado em 1994 e conta hoje com 17 turmas já formadas. Através de um questionário foram examinados o impacto do curso conforme percebido pelos egressos e sua evolução na carreira pós-MBA. Essas informações foram cruzadas com o perfil dos alunos e com seu desempenho acadêmico, buscando determinar os fatores que implicam no sucesso dos alunos após o curso. Para tanto, a pesquisa valeu-se da estatística descritiva e da Análise por Tabela de Contingência. Ao final, são apresentadas algumas conclusões iniciais e questões para aprofundamento.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations12
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Contabilidade & FinançasSame topicBusiness and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207