MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311321509 · doi:10.12973/eu-jer.12.1.173

Professional Certifications of a University Master’s Degree and Employability: Impact on Students’ Perception

2022· article· en· W4311321509 on OpenAlexaff
David Peón, Xosé-Manuel Martínez-Filgueira, José-Luís Rodríguez-Gómez

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Educational Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education and Employability
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersMinisterio de Ciencia e Innovación
KeywordsEmployabilityAccreditationCertificationMedical educationHigher educationPsychologyQuality (philosophy)PerceptionPedagogyManagementPolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Professional certifications represent for many university degrees, especially postgraduate degrees, a recognition of their academic quality and the future employability of the graduates. This article contributes to the analysis of the impact of external accreditations on students’ perception of employability and satisfaction. We offer a case of study, a Master of Science (MSc) in Banking and Finance that became the first academic degree in Spain to obtain the two professional accreditations required for employees in financial institutions since 2019. A survey to a sample of students who graduated two academic years before and two years after the MSc was recognised is used to measure students' motivations for enrolment and satisfaction. The results provide significant evidence that professional accreditation became a key motivation for students to enrol the master, is associated with a more diverse geographical origin of students, and students highlight the higher quality and better coordination of the teaching staff.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.302
GPT teacher head0.488
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Educational ResearchSame topicHigher Education and EmployabilityFrench-language works237,207