Intercultural Competencies in Graduate Students of a Private University in Lima
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the years, the importance of good relationships to carry out healthy teamwork in our diverse land has become evident in the world. Putting on the table the importance of having suitable intercultural skills for the realization of these. In this framework, the purpose of the study was to know the level of intercultural competences of graduate students from a private university in Lima, from a non-experimental quantitative approach with a simple descriptive scope. The population was 1000 students and the samples were made up of 296 master's students. The instrument was a questionnaire of intercultural competences. It was found as results that 36.0% have very adequate intercultural competences and the predominant dimension was intercultural sensitivity, presenting a very adequate level of 83.0% with a predominance of (Wald = 16.842) compared to the other Intercultural Awareness dimensions with (Wald = 9.654) and rejecting the general hypothesis that proposed the intercultural ability which obtained (Wald = 7.432). Concluding that, from this study, strategies should be generated that strengthen the development of intercultural competences with emphasis on its most lacking indicators in master students because they are primarily responsible for guiding the training of future professionals in all areas.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".