Not Everything Important Is Taught in the Classroom: Using Cocurricular Professional Development Workshops to Enhance Student Careers
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
Business schools and graduate business programs have struggled since their inception to ensure that what students learn in their courses will resonate with the skills needed in their careers. To date, there has been limited attention paid to cocurricular experiential learning opportunities to assist with this challenge. In this article, we discuss the process of implementing cocurricular professional development (PD) workshops as part of a college-wide initiative to increase experiential learning opportunities for students. This college-wide initiative challenged two assumptions: first, that the classroom is the best space for valuable learning and second, that faculty are the best equipped to lead decisions on what students should learn. The workshops help students develop both the tangible and intangible skills required to succeed in industry. We faced many challenges in implementing the workshops, including the need to challenge the predominant view that nothing of significant value could be learned in a workshop. We conclude our article by identifying the factors responsible for the ultimate success of the program and offer guidance for colleges looking to change perceptions of value in learning and broaden their experiential learning practices.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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