MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150016039 · doi:10.5430/wje.v5n1p102

Industrial Training Programmes of Polytechnics in Ghana: The Pertinent Issues

2015· article· en· W2150016039 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Education · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education and Employability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraining (meteorology)Thematic analysisCompetition (biology)On-the-job trainingJob trainingEngineeringBusinessEngineering managementOperations managementManagementPedagogyPsychologySociologyEconomic growthEconomicsQualitative researchVocational educationSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In today’s world of stiff competition in the labour market, coupled with advanced technology, industries require ofstudents to have job experience before employing them. The challenge here is that the experience being required isnot taught in the lecture rooms. The reality is that, it is only gained though hands on the job, thus real worldconfrontation popularly called industrial attachment a platform for students arm themselves with all the skill,knowledge and demanded experience. This article examines the industrial attachment programmes of polytechnics inGhana and pertinent issues involved. The paper tackled the problem from four thematic areas; the preparation beforethe training starts, the perceived challenges encountered, the benefits derived from embarking on the training andsuggested strategies to be employed to enhance the programme.

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 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)0.003
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.636
Threshold uncertainty score0.471

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.152
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.263 · 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