MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122111875 · doi:10.5430/ijba.v6n1p1

Anatomy of an MBA Program Capstone Project Assessment Measure for AACSB Accreditation

2014· article· en· W2122111875 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Deborah M. Gray, Vigdis Wangchao Boasson, Michael Carson, Debasish Chakraborty

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Business Administration · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Marketing Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccreditationCapstoneCurriculumProcess (computing)Medical educationRanking (information retrieval)Measure (data warehouse)Computer scienceCapstone courseRubricEngineering managementBusinessPsychologyMathematics educationMedicinePedagogyEngineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is very little written about assessment measures business schools use for assessing their programs that not only helps them meet the assessment criteria necessary for AACSB accreditation but also helps them improve the curriculum to build top-tier successful programs. This paper informs the literature on the assessment measure (and process) used by an MBA program to assess student learning through end-of-program capstone projects; success that is demonstrated by stabilized enrollments and a recent top-tier ranking. This paper is useful to any graduate or undergraduate business program that chooses to use capstone projects as an assessment measure to earn or renew AACSB accreditation. Following guidelines suggested by Banta (2004, 2007, 2011) and Polomba and Banta, (1999) a defined process is implemented to collect, assess, and disseminate assessment data to improve the MBA curriculum.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.815
Threshold uncertainty score0.524

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Business AdministrationSame topicManagement and Marketing EducationFrench-language works237,207