MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969648371 · doi:10.5430/ijhe.v8n5p71

A Qualitative Research Study on the Importance of Life Skills on Undergraduate Students’ Personal and Social Competencies

2019· article· en· W2969648371 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Pradeep Nair, Mehrnaz Fahimirad

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Higher Education · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education and Employability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLife skillsSkills managementSocial skillsPsychologyMedical educationCurriculumThematic analysisTeamworkSoft skillsInterpersonal communicationTransferable skills analysisTime managementPersonal lifeQualitative researchPedagogyHigher educationMedicineSocial psychologyManagementSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, it is more demanding to enter job market since current employers hire staff with some life skills such as leadership, communication skills, time management, problem solving skills, and teamwork. The current study aimed to identify the relationship between life skills program, student's personal efficacy and competencies. Moreover, this study investigated eight students’ perceptions of their personal efficacy after understanding life skills program. This study employs a qualitative research approach using an in-depth interview and self-reporting of the life skills module. The participants were randomly selected among freshman undergraduate students who have passed the life skill modules at Taylor’s University, Malaysia. This study aimed to identify students’ perceptions, competencies after completing life skills modules. It also elaborates on how life skills considered as a technical requirement for hard skills and employees’ future. The results of thematic analysis indicated that embedding the life-skills program in the university curriculum plays a key role in shaping students' personal and social competencies. This finding has important implications for educators and educational policy makers to integrate students’ life skills into curriculum so as to influence students’ professional and interpersonal skills such as team working, communication, leadership, time management, decision making and problem-solving.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.531
Teacher spread0.410 · 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

Citations49
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Higher EducationSame topicHigher Education and EmployabilityFrench-language works237,207