MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W253389028

Are we on the wrong track and so do MIS curricula need to be reengineered

2011· article· en· W253389028 on OpenAlexaff
David Gefen, Arik Ragowsky, Ephraim R. McLean, M. Lynne Markus, Suzanne Rivard, Matti Rossi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Association for Information Systems · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Knowledge Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumPerspective (graphical)Track (disk drive)Panel discussionEngineering managementBalance (ability)BusinessEngineering ethicsComputer scienceKnowledge managementPublic relationsEngineeringPolitical scienceSociologyPsychologyAdvertisingPedagogy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extensive discussions and roundtables done by the panelists with tens of CIOs in recent years suggest that there is increased CIO concern about the depreciation in the perceived importance of MIS in the industry and a need therefore to adapt the curriculum of MIS and its place in the MBA program to what the industry needs. The panel will discuss this issue by first presenting the industry view of the issue based on CIO input and with it the need to reengineer the curriculum accordingly to tune it to what the industry, our clients, needs. The panel will then balance this perspective with a more cautious academic one. Practical steps academia can take will also be discussed.

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)0.039
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.113
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.208

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0390.113
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0080.010
Scholarly communication0.0210.024
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0080.016
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.011

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Association for Information SystemsSame topicInnovation and Knowledge ManagementFrench-language works237,207