Pedagogical interventions to overcome communication apprehension in employment interviews among career students.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Career programs in the Cegep system base their training on various learning activities, which are followed by a practicum. The objective is to achieve a certain number of competencies, deemed necessary by the Ministry of Education, for entry-level occupations in to the workforce. The Graphic Communications program offered at Champlain College Saint-Lambert is a three-year career program that leads to employment in the field of graphics. Many students have part-time jobs during their schooling period but most of those jobs do not relate to their field of study. Several graduates stated they were unable to persuade employers to hire them for an externship or stage at the end of their program. While jobs are important for their general skills, since they are not directly related to the field, these jobs may not have given the students a suitable model for the conduct of an employment interview. Practice interviews may be one of many successful training methods to lower communication apprehension (CA) levels. CA is defined as "an individual's level of fear or anxiety associated with either real or anticipated communication with another person or persons." This paper examines the literature on CA and employment interviews and evaluates whether pedagogical interventions, including monitored phone calls to employers and practice-videotaped interviews, allow students to feel more confident about interviewing for a future job. A qualitative tool was used to gather scientific measurements of the participants' levels of CA both at the beginning and at the end of the Career Planning course. Open-ended reflective journals gathered quantitative data on the impact specific instructional strategies had on the participants. The pedagogical interventions that were examined and tested were as follows: preparation of scripts, monitored phone calls, videotaped practice interviews, and in-class access to professional assistance. Results indicate that all interventions had a positive impact on lowering levels of CA. It is clear that positive conclusions were drawn by the students as to the usefulness of these activities. Overall, participants who responded to the reflective journal questions felt positive about the contribution of this preparatory career course to their CA levels. The results of the quantitative tool were consistent with previous research and the analysis of the reflective journals gave additional support to the usefulness of the interventions on students' confidence levels. Recommendations for improvements to the curriculum include the need for students to be taught formally about metacognition and how to monitor it. Students need to be exposed to videotaped interviews more often. They should be better prepared for unexpected interview questions, and they should experience formal rehearsals with one of their instructors before the actual practice interview. Some of these recommendations have already been successfully implemented in the program's curriculum.
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 | 0.012 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".