MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080688832 · doi:10.5539/ijms.v2n1p127

Graduates Employment: Valuable of Curtin University of Technology Sarawak Graduates

2010· article· en· W2080688832 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chai Lee Goi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Marketing Studies · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education and Employability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGraduation (instrument)SalaryWork (physics)UnemploymentCeremonyInstitutionMarketingQuality (philosophy)Unemployment rateVocational educationMedical educationManagementBusinessEngineeringPsychologySociologyPolitical sciencePedagogyEconomic growthGeographyEconomicsSocial scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main objective of this research is to study the valuable of Curtin University of Technology Sarawak’s graduates in 2006, as well as to study graduates’ perception and recommendation on programs offered. Questionnaires were distributed to School of Business and School of Engineering’s graduates before the Graduation Ceremony held on 11th May 2006 at the Imperial Hall, Mega Hotel. The study found that the employment rate is 64.9% in 2006. Unemployment rate dropped from 36% in 2004 to 25.3% in 2005 and then increased to 35.1% in 2006, however, from this unemployment group, it is found that 58.5% was ‘Still seeking for work’ scenario, while 32.3% took a break, 6.2% further studies, 1.5% choose not to work and 1.5% find difficult in getting a suitable job. The study also shows that around 69.17% of the Curtin’s graduate salary ranges are between RM1000 – RM1500 and RM1500 – RM1800. Related to graduates’ perception on the university, majority of students are very satisfied with the program offered by the school and even like to recommend their family members to study in this institution. However, number of recommendations was provided by the graduates to improve the quality of the programs. The program to be more relevant to the needs of the industry, especially industry training and practical work experiences, constant visitation to industry workplaces for better learning, applications towards theoretical components and increased contemporary knowledge currently practiced at the workplace to be brought into the classroom.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.193
Threshold uncertainty score0.591

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Marketing StudiesSame topicHigher Education and EmployabilityFrench-language works237,207