MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411003950 · doi:10.55248/gengpi.6.0525.1948

Bridging the Gap: Integrating Global Practices in CPD with the Lived Experiences of Filipino CPA Educators

2025· article· en· W4411003950 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Timoleon S. Lianza

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Research Publication and Reviews · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Systems and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBridging (networking)Lived experiencePsychologySociologyPedagogyComputer sciencePsychoanalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines how global best practices in Continuing Professional Development (CPD) from leading accounting education systems can be integrated with the lived experiences of Certified Public Accountant (CPA) educators in the Philippines.Anchored in findings from a prior phenomenological study involving six CPA teachers from a state university, this article critically juxtaposes their insights with established CPD frameworks in Australia, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Singapore.Thematic analysis surfaced five core themes: regulatory-driven compliance, financial and institutional constraints, limited perceived CPD relevance, recognized benefits in professional updating, and strong calls for policy and structural reform.A comparative matrix reveals that Philippine CPD policies currently fall short in key areas such as flexible delivery modes, institutional integration, outcome-based assessment mechanisms, and state-supported subsidies.In response, this study proposes a hybrid CPD model that contextualizes international best practices to better fit the Philippine higher education system.The model emphasizes institutional and financial support, alignment with educators' specific teaching roles, and enhanced accessibility through blended and modular learning platforms.By bridging lived experiences with global standards, the study contributes a research-informed, actionable pathway towards a more responsive, equitable, and sustainable CPD framework tailored for Filipino CPA educators.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.540
Threshold uncertainty score0.851

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.198
GPT teacher head0.565
Teacher spread0.367 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Research Publication and ReviewsSame topicEducation Systems and PolicyFrench-language works237,207