Engineering Education Research and Development at Queen’s University
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Research and development in engineering education has been prominent at Queen’s University since the early 1990’s. Initially focused on evolving improved methods to encompass theoretical, practical, industrial, and multidisciplinary aspects into undergraduate engineering programs, the outcome of those early endeavours became what is now known as “Integrated Learning” at Queen’s. This effort also recognized the need for a new and different facility to accommodate evolving pedagogical approaches and enhanced team-based activities, and in 2005, the 6,000 m2 Integrated Learning Centre was opened. Both the Integrated Learning philosophy and the corresponding facility have been a tremendous success. With the establishment of Integrated Learning , engineering education research began to expand both in breadth and depth. Research studies and publications have included topics such as optimized assessment of both students and pedagogical activities, understanding student attitudes towards learning, evaluating engineering practitioners’ needs and expectations of engineering graduates, defining needs for outreach activities, developing and assessing measurements for graduate attributes, and using web-based classroom response systems for quality student feedback. Graduate students have been engaged in engineering education research topics for nearly a decade, with the first Master’s student with a full- fledged engineering education research topic graduating in 2006, and the first post-doctoral researcher hired in 2011. Additional graduate students have been engaged in engineering education research since, producing four more Master’s graduates to date, and two more in process. The outcomes from this research, combined with collaborative efforts across the faculty, have resulted in new and innovative pedagogy, including the Multidisciplinary Design Stream and the recently introduced Engineering Design & Professional Practice sequence. Both of these programs include a combination of proven and innovative pedagogy, and through multiple assessment techniques, themselves become the subject of ongoing research and development. Further research studies are underway. One is exploring how critical thinking develops in first year engineering, and whether the use of complex authentic engineering problems assists in developing critical thinking. Queen’s is also part of a learning outcomes consortium project with Toronto, Guelph, and University of Kansas, and three Ontario colleges, to develop procedures for assessing learning outcomes at an institutional level. In addition, Queen’s is part of a collaboration with 7 Canadian and US schools on research into sustaining change in institutions and influencing adoption of evidence-based practices. The panel presentation will provide more detail on our past, present, and future research in this field. The engineering education research community in Canada is dynamic but under-represented, and it is hoped that this session will encourage more engineering academics to venture into this field.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,009 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,007 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,012 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,068 | 0,023 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».