MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2218830615 · doi:10.5539/ies.v8n11p204

SoSTeM Model Development for Application of Soft Skills to Engineering Students at Malaysian Polytechnics

2015· article· en· W2218830615 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ahmad Esa, Suhaili Padil, Asri Selamat, Mohammad Idris

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education and Employability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoft skillsProcess (computing)Class (philosophy)Engineering educationSkills managementMathematics educationTeaching methodPsychologyMedical educationEngineeringPedagogyComputer scienceEngineering managementMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p class="apa">Soft skills are some of the skills needed to ensure that graduates fulfill the needs of the job market. Until 2010, almost 30% of unemployed graduates in Malaysia are technical graduates and one third comes are graduates from polytechnic. Most engineering graduates are proficient in technical skills but lack in soft skills. The lack of relevant knowledge among lecturers in order to identify appropriate ways and methods in the process of teaching and learning is one of the causes of lack in soft skills application. This study aims to identify the suitable teaching methods for the application of soft skills in the engineering programs for engineering students in Malaysian polytechnics. 488 students and 332 lecturers in engineering courses at the polytechnic had been questioned using questionnaires and interviews. The results showed that there is a relationship between the level of application of soft skills element with the teaching & learning methods used by lecturers. Based on these relationships, researchers had produced <em>SoSTeM </em>model as the model of application of soft skills for engineering students. Researchers also discovered that the use of teaching & learning methods for applying soft skills in engineering programs vary according to the elements of soft skills.</p>

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.376 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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