MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041665201 · doi:10.1108/heswbl-08-2014-0037

Graduate Certificates in Ontario colleges: uniquely engaging in specialized skills development

2015· article· en· W2041665201 on OpenAlexaffabout
Laura A. Thorsell

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher Education Skills and Work-based Learning · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education and Employability
Canadian institutionsAlgonquin College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScholarshipCertificateCredentialCurriculumContext (archaeology)Value (mathematics)OriginalityMedical educationHigher educationPedagogyPsychologyPublic relationsSociologyPolitical scienceComputer scienceMedicineSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine Graduate Certificates in colleges in Ontario, Canada, and their distinctive ability to generate intrinsic student engagement in specialized skills development, and a culture of progression and scholarship. Design/methodology/approach – This is a review of selected literature on student engagement. While extrinsic motivation, such as employment, has most often been discussed this paper purposefully considers intrinsic motivation and factors that build deeper engagement in students. This paper compares and contrasts the literature, and its link with the features of the Ontario College Graduate Certificate in Canada. More specifically, it examines the background and development of the credential in the context of the movement towards competency-based education. Findings – This paper postulates that colleges can uniquely provide applied and intrinsically engaging programming through credentials like the Graduate Certificate. The Graduate Certificate helps heighten graduate skills engagement, a culture of progression and scholarship, and ultimately competitiveness in today’s workplace. Practical implications – The findings of this paper have implications for colleges to distinguish themselves amongst post-secondary institutions as providers of specialized skills development in higher education, especially as competency-based education grows in importance. It also puts in to question how this type of engaging design can be further built in to post-secondary graduate curriculum. Originality/value – This paper illuminates innovative practice at the post-graduate level, as an example of a skills-based scholarly activity. It helps position colleges as providers of effective, competency and outcomes-based higher education. This paper can add value to practitioners looking to build similar programming, by combining this Graduate Certificate design with evidence-based factors that build student engagement, particularly intrinsic motivation.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.946
Threshold uncertainty score0.395

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.079
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations7
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher Education Skills and Work-based LearningSame topicHigher Education and EmployabilityFrench-language works237,207