Impacto de Erasmus+ en Estudiantes de Formación Profesional.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La movilidad internacional de estudiantes de Formación Profesional (FP) ha sido poco estudiada a diferencia de la movilidad Universitaria. Esta investigación evalúa la experiencia de estudiantes en prácticas de formación profesional de grado medio en programas de movilidad Erasmus+ entre 2015 y 2021, impulsada por el Ayuntamiento de Soria (España) en colaboración con los siete centros educativos FP de la ciudad. El objetivo consiste en indagar sobre el impacto percibido de la experiencia en las dimensiones: laboral, lingüística y personal. La metodología se compone de encuestas a 57 estudiantes y entrevistas semiestructuradas a gestores del programa, seguimiento longitudinal de los resultados, utilizando el paquete SPSS, para continuar con el análisis de cambios percibidos. Entre los resultados destaca que los estudiantes mejoran su valoración del impacto en su vida profesional de la experiencia de movilidad internacional pasados 2 o 3 años y que se valoran mejor las experiencias a nivel personal cuando el destino de la movilidad son países Mediterráneos, más afines culturalmente.
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 | 0.015 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".