La configuración institucional de las comisiones de mérito en los procesos selectivos: experiencias comparadas y aplicación al contexto español
Bibliographic record
Abstract
espanolEl presente articulo trata de la necesidad de repensar la vigente configuracion institucional de nuestro modelo selectivo para hacer frente a las transformaciones que el sector publico debe acometer en los proximos anos. Los retos principales en el ambito de la seleccion son: capacidad para atraer a candidatos suficientes en numero y talento de todos los ambitos de la sociedad, realizar procesos de manera agil y transparente, y garantizar la aplicacion de los principios de igualdad, merito y capacidad de una manera eficaz. Para ello se parte de una identificacion de las principales deficiencias de esa configuracion institucional y, a continuacion, se analizan varias experiencias comparadas de las que extraer algunos aprendizajes a partir de la figura de las denominadas Comisiones de Merito; en concreto los casos de Reino Unido, Estados Unidos, Canada y la Union Europea. A la vista de estas experiencias, se propone la creacion de un organismo de seleccion especializado e independiente, basado en los organismos permanentes de seleccion, y que resuelva las reclamaciones en esta materia EnglishThis paper deals with the need to rethink the current institutional configuration of our selection model to face the transformations that the public sector must undertake in the coming years. The main challenges in the field of selection are: ability to attract enough candidates in number and talent from all areas of society, performing procedures in an agile and transparent manner, and ensuring the application of the principles of equality, merit and ability in an effective way. To this end, we start with an identification of the main deficiencies of this institutional configuration and, next, several comparative experiences on the figure of the so-called Merit Commissions are analyzed to draw some lessons from; in particular the cases of the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada and the European Union. In light of these experiences, it is proposed to create a specialized and independent selection agency, based on permanent selection bodies, to resolve complaints in this area euskaraGaur egun daukagun aukeratzeko ereduaren erakunde konfigurazioaren gainean hausnarketa berria egin beharko genuke, sektore publikoak datozen urteetan izango dituen aldaketei aurre egin ahal izateko. Hori da artikulu honen gaia. Aukeratzearen inguruan honako erronka nagusi hauek ditugu: gizarte esparru guztietako hautagaiak erakartzeko gai izatea eta hautagai horiek ugari eta talentudunak izatea; prozesuak erraz eta gardentasunez gauzatzea; eta berdintasunaren, merezimenduaren eta gaitasunaren printzipioak eraginkortasunez aplikatzen direla bermatzea. Asmo horrekin, lehenbizi erakundeak gaur egun duen konfigurazioaren huts nagusienak identifikatzen dira eta, gero, esperientzia batzuk aztertzen eta alderatzen dira. Azken azterketa horretatik, gainera, ikasketa batzuk ateratzen dira Merezimenduen Batzordeak izenekoetatik abiatuta (eta zehatzago, Erresuma Batuaren, Ameriketako Estatu Batuen, Kanadaren eta Europar Batasunaren kasuetatik abiatuta). Esperientzia horiek guztiak aintzat hartuta, aukeratzeko erakunde espezializatua eta independentea sortzea proposatzen da. Erakundeak, izan ere, aukeratzeko erakunde iraunkorrak hartu behar ditu oinarri moduan, eta gai horri lotutako erreklamazioak ebatzi behar ditu
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".