MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Investigating the Role of Professional Accounting Education in Enhancing Meta-Competency Development

2020· book-chapter· en· W3164106356 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mark T. Morpurgo, Ana Azevedo

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in human resources management and organizational development book series · 2020
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAccounting Education and Careers
Canadian institutionsAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTeamworkPerceptionPsychologyOptimismMedical educationProfessional developmentSet (abstract data type)Critical thinkingKnowledge managementPedagogyPolitical scienceMedicineComputer scienceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A broad set of business competencies, meta-competencies (MCs), include influencing/persuading, teamwork/relationship building, critical/analytical thinking, self/time management, leadership, strategic thinking, presentation, and communication. This chapter incorporates research from two studies examining MCs in undergraduate and professional business programs. The MISLEM project found that, in comparison to graduates, employers demonstrated less optimism about graduates' competencies. Subsequently, Morpurgo investigated differences in the perception of competency acquisition between professional accountants (PAs) and supervisors in Canada by posing three questions: 1) Is there a MC importance gap between Canadian PAs and their supervisors? 2) Do professional accounting programs contribute to bridging the MC capability gap? and 3) What factors contribute to MC development? The study found perceptual differences between PAs and supervisors regarding the importance and capability of MCs as well as differences in work experience and classroom learning for competency development.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in human resources management and organizational development book seriesSame topicAccounting Education and CareersFrench-language works237,207