A SNAPSHOT OF THE CANADIAN ENGINEERING EDUCATION SYSTEM: REFLECTIONS FROM AN EMERGING SCHOLAR TRYING TO SUPPORT NATIONAL CURRICULUM CHANGE
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
The Canadian Engineering Education Challenge (CEEC) is an initiative with the goal of ‘developing a national collaboration to target engineering curriculum to graduate students who will be eminently prepared to take on the challenges of the future’. The National Coordinator performed a scan of the education system across Canadian engineering programs to determine existing initiatives, and common challenges. The objectives of this work are: 1. Identify needs and challenges of the Canadian Engineering Education system, and 2. Identify challenges and opportunities in providing support to curricular change initiatives. 
 This work is conceptually framed and driven through the Coordinator’s perspectives, assumptions and goals, using an action research framework. A qualitative inductive thematic analysis is used to identify common themes and trends from across visits and conversations with over 60 individuals from 14 institutions. A secondary goal of this work is to share the process, lessons learned, and personal reflections, with those who have contributed to generating the data, and others entering into the field of Engineering Education.
 Several trends emerged from the data, which elucidate needs and challenges. These include: distinct roles in the system, curricular initiatives relating to non-technical skills and design spine, challenges associated with Engineering Education Research and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, the impact and inertia of culture, modeling and instructor training related to non-technical skills, funding promotes change, and the importance of terminology and shared understanding.
 Considerations became apparent which may inform how to best support individuals and the system. These include: the need to align with the existing priorities of others, the desire for engineering educators to learn from each other, the power of culture, and incentives to promote engagement.
 This work will serve to identify potential opportunities for the CEEC to leverage collaboration between institutions with common alignment, as well as important considerations to be incorporated for the CEEC to maximize impact. Finally, this work hopes to provide valuable insight to others who wish to engage more deeply in Engineering Education.
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 | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 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