MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2617765882

Graduate Employability: Student Perceptions of PBL and its Effectiveness in Facilitating their Employability Skills

2013· article· en· W2617765882 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mike Smith, Mike Duncan, Kathryn Cook

Bibliographic record

VenuePractice and evidence of scholarship of teaching and learning in higher education · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicProblem and Project Based Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmployabilityCurriculumPerceptionMedical educationPsychologyWork (physics)Quarter (Canadian coin)PedagogyMathematics educationEngineeringMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The percentage of recent graduates employed in lower skilled jobs increased from 26.7 per cent in 2001 to 35.9 per cent, in the final quarter of 2011, while approximately one new graduate in every five available to work is unemployed (ONS, 2012). It is therefore a matter of urgency for higher educational institutions to investigate ways that can increase student opportunities to develop their employability skills within the curriculum. This study implemented a problem-based learning (PBL) approach in to the curriculum across all three levels of an undergraduate Sports Psychology program. Student perceptions of their satisfaction with and how important they felt a PBL approach was in facilitating their employability skills were investigated. Results indicate that regardless of whether students liked, disliked or were unsure of PBL, they all reported that PBL facilitated their employability skills. The paper concluded that PBL is a viable form of teaching when looking to facilitate student employability skills.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.342 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations16
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePractice and evidence of scholarship of teaching and learning in higher educationSame topicProblem and Project Based LearningFrench-language works237,207