Graduates’ Competence on Employability Skills and Job Performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One critical measure of success in workplaces is employee’s ability to use competently the knowledge, skills and values that match the needs of his job, satisfy the demands of his employer, and contribute to the overall achievement of institutional goals. An explanatory-correlational research design was used to determine the extent of relationship between three categories of employability skills (using The Conference Board of Canada’s Employability Skills 2000+) and five elements of Contextual Performance adopted from Borman and Motowidlo’s Taxonomy. There were a total of 220 respondents representing the groups of employers and employees from 25 government institutions in the south-central part of Mindanao region, Philippines. Inferential analysis shows that fundamental skills had moderate relationship with employees’ contextual performance; however, being more competent in thinking and problem solving skills provides employees with more benefits in performing contextual behavior. Findings further revealed that although personal management skills had moderate relationship with employees’ contextual behavior, the competence in personal adaptability and learning continuously are contributory across all elements of contextual performance. Finally, the result of the study yielded that teamwork skills, particularly the skill on working with others, were also moderately correlated with employees’ contextual performance. This implies that graduates’ competence in employability skills could give them due advantage in their respective work settings. Thus, proper attention on developing competence on employability skills by employers, employees, higher academic institutions, labor agencies, and policy makers may help address the problems on job performance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".