<![CDATA[This study examined the explanatory structure and predictive reproducibility of an end-of-program administrative score used to assess graduate preparedness in vocational education. A cross-sectional secondary analysis was conducted using 450 de-identified learner records collected from four anonymized polytechnic-style institutions during the 2023–2024 academic year. The outcome was a 0–100 composite score analyzed continuously and as three prespecified categories: low (<60), moderate (60–79), and high (≥80). Candidate predictors comprised practical skills, digital competence, soft skills, internship intensity, project performance, and an industry–education integration index treated as an institution-linked contextual proxy. Pearson correlations, heteroskedasticity-consistent ordinary least-squares regression, criterion-overlap sensitivity analysis, and leakage-controlled model development were applied. Six algorithms were compared against a majority-class baseline using a stratified 70:30 development-test split. Bootstrap intervals, ordinal-error measures, and probability-calibration indices were used to quantify uncertainty and performance. The full regression model explained 76% of outcome variance (adjusted R² = 0.75), whereas the reduced model retained an adjusted R² of 0.58 after removal of predictors susceptible to shared rubric content. In the untouched test partition (n = 135), the back-propagation neural network achieved an accuracy of 0.904 and a macro-F1 of 0.903; all 13 errors occurred between adjacent categories. These findings indicate a coherent within-system scoring structure and strong reproducibility across analytical approaches. However, they do not establish causal effects, transportability across institutions, fairness, operational utility, or prediction of subsequent labor-market outcomes. The model should therefore be restricted to low-stakes auditing, data-quality review, and identification of borderline records pending prospective multi-institutional evaluation.]]>
