doi: 10.11648/j.sjedu.20130103.12 Transfer securing of vocational education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: The objective of the study is to examine the extent to which shortcomings can be identified in the sub-process chain for securing and evaluating the learning transfer in vocational education at companies in the Federal Republic of Germany. It is argued that there are shortcomings in securing the learning transfer in vocational education at companies in Germany. All the companies in the DAX30, MDAX, SDAX and TecDAX and/or the 500 family-owned companies with the highest sales revenue and at least 1,000 employees were surveyed in this investigation. The sampling consisted of 632 of 660 companies in total. 107 companies took part in the online survey. The findings in the study show that only one quarter of the examined companies in Germany secured and evaluated the entire process chain for the learning transfer. The methods applied for securing the learning transfer at companies exhibit conceptual shortcomings in the securing of the learning transfer. A model for securing the learning transfer has been developed and recommended for specific transfer securing of vocational education for German companies.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.320 | 0.186 |
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".