MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167262551 · doi:10.5539/ass.v9n8p42

Employability Skills Indicator as Perceived by Manufacturing Employers

2013· article· en· W2167262551 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohamad Sattar Rasul, Azlin Norhaini Mansor

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education and Employability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmployabilityManufacturingWork (physics)Social skillsInterpersonal communicationProductivityBusinessPsychologyMarketingMedical educationPedagogyEngineeringEconomic growthEconomicsSocial psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research on employability skills were conducted nationally and internationally, found that many technical graduates lacked employability skills. This article reports on the study of employability skills that technical students should acquire to be employed and sustained in manufacturing industries. The study investigates the importance of employability skills as perceived by 107 employers from manufacturing industries. The findings of the study revealed employers place great importance on interpersonal skills, thinking skills and personal qualities that students need to emphasize to be employed in manufacturing industries. Indicators such as work safety, integrity, customer service, creative/innovative thinking and problem solving, and exercise leadership showed the highest mean score. Overall employers from manufacturing industries placed employability skills as must be owned by all graduates to enable them to compete in the global market.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Citations46
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicHigher Education and EmployabilityFrench-language works237,207