Benchmarking International Industrial Engineering Programs
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract NOTE: The first page of text has been automatically extracted and included below in lieu of an abstract Benchmarking International IE Programs Introduction Fraser6 compared the 101 ABET accredited industrial engineering programs by location, size, and other descriptors, as well as by the inclusion of different courses in the curricula. Except for two programs in Puerto Rico, all these programs are in the United States. In this paper, we extend that comparison to include industrial engineering programs in other countries in order to find ideas that US programs (and programs in other countries that use the US model) should consider for adoption from IE programs outside the US. We found differences in total number of credit hours and in number of years required for the IE degree, in the amount of general education included in the degree, and in the strength of ties to industry. We noted trends toward standardization of degrees in certain countries and regions and toward international links among programs. We make two recommendations related to partners: IE programs should seek partnerships with mechanical engineering and with business programs, and IE programs should seek partners with universities in other countries. Methods for finding IE programs in other countries We compiled a list of programs to be examined by drawing from the following sources. Washington Accord Programs. The Washington Accord, signed in 1989, is an agreement among engineering accrediting bodies in Australia, Canada, Ireland, Hong Kong, New Zealand, South Africa, United Kingdom, and the United States. The agreement “recognizes the substantial equivalency of programs accredited by those bodies, and recommends that graduates of accredited programs in any of the signatory countries be recognized by the other countries as having met the academic requirements for entry to the practice of engineering.” See www.washingtonaccord.org. •Institution of Engineers Australia, www.ieaust.org.au •Canadian Council of Professional Engineers, www.ccpe.ca •The Hong Kong Institution of Engineers, www.hkie.org.hk •Engineers Ireland, www.iei.ie •Japan Accrediting Board for Engineering Education, www.jabee.org •Institution of Professional Engineers New Zealand •Engineering Council of South Africa, www.ecsa.co.za •Engineering Council United Kingdom (ECUK), www.engc.org.uk The following are not members of the Washington Accord, but were useful websites: •ASIIN (Germany), www.asiin.de •CACEI (Mexico), Consejo de Acreditacion de la Ensenanza de la Ingenieria, www.cacei.org.
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.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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 découle