Evaluation of Computer Science and Software Engineering Undergraduate’s Soft Skills in Egypt from Student’s Perspective
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soft skills for software engineers turned out to be a very important factor in the success of any project helping the team’s dynamics and performance. Conversely, computer science undergraduates are possibly not aware of the importance of soft skills for their careers. Accordingly this paper’s main purpose is to highlight the gaps that exist for computer science graduates in Egypt. In this paper we present a simplified systematic literature review approach for this topic. A survey is conducted in Hellwan University, Cairo, Egypt where 136 computer and software engineering graduating students participated. The survey purpose was to uncover how students evaluate the importance of softs skills, how much they attain these skills, in addition to how much they think the university is helping its development. One outcome of our analysis is that there is a lack of understanding on how to define and thus provide those soft skills for computer science graduating students in Egypt.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it