Using online to enhance student engagement of design reviews and lessons learned experiences
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This paper is about using the online environment to increase engagement in design and instilling a recognition of the importance of life long learning. The work assesses changes in the delivery of a 4th year nuclear engineering design course and evaluates changes in the delivery of the course as it migrated from face to face to hybrid to online. In particular, the design review process was used to enhance engagement of the student body and a lessons learned exercise was used to enhance reflection on life long learning. The engagement is assessed in terms of class attendance, activity within the learning management system, and direct engagement in the design review process. The design review process requires each student to both present a design and to critique another group’s design. The design work is done as a team but the critique is done as an individual paralleling the industry process currently in use for the nuclear sector. In addition to the technical details, the performance of each student with respect to their soft skills is also assessed. This includes the number of students that actively engage or passively engage during both presentation and critique stages. Following the design review process, the students then engage in a lessons learned activity similar to what is done in the industry but simplified to focus on their experience. The activity also included an opportunity to reflect on themselves and establish a life long learning plan to address their personal findings. Note the paper will not discuss the personal findings specifically but instead will comment on the engagement of the students. Before using online approaches, the students fell into two distinct groups. One set was strongly active in the design review process and the other set was strongly resistive to participation and did the minimum necessary to get through the exercise. It was very clear that many students felt uncomfortable speaking openly in front of others. This changed significantly with the use of online technology. There was a significant increase in the number of students that engaged or at least felt comfortable to speak in the online setting. Some students displayed perhaps too much comfort in working from their personal environment space. This observation was also noted in the lessons learned exercise where the students went from saying the minimum necessary to having a large amount of insightful comments to make. The results suggest that allowing online participation in the experience has encouraged engagement of students that would resist a face to face experience.
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 | 0,015 | 0,060 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,009 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,015 | 0,008 |
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 ».