Lifelong learning mindset and career success: evidence from the field of accounting and finance
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this article is to examine the relationship between a lifelong learning mindset and career success. A lifelong learning mindset is a way of approaching one's work with curiosity, strategic thinking, and resilience. Career success refers to objective (e.g., number of promotions) and subjective (e.g., job satisfaction) indicators of progress and fulfillment in one's work. Design/methodology/approach Two studies are presented. Both studies draw from an accounting and finance program at a Canadian university. In study 1, data were collected from students ( n = 62) and their supervisors at the end of a four-month co-operative education (co-op) work term. In study 2, data were collected from graduates ( n = 148). Findings Results suggest that developing a lifelong learning mindset enhances both objective and subjective career success. Participants' lifelong learning mindset was associated with objective career success in both studies (supervisor-rated performance in study 1 and number of promotions in study 2). Lifelong learning mindset was associated with subjective career success in study 2 (job satisfaction, work engagement, and job-related self-efficacy) but not in study 1 (experience satisfaction). Originality/value This article presents the first empirical examination of the relationship between a lifelong learning mindset and career success. Insights from the article highlight the fact that educators and workplace managers might work together to promote a lifelong learning mindset for current and future workers.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it