DEVELOPMENT OF AN ENGINEERING CLASS PROJECT INCORPORATING A PERSONAL VISION OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT TEACHING
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The decade 2005-2014 has been set by UNESCO as the United Nations decade of Education forSustainable Development (SD) [1]. As graduate studentsof this decade, our vision of SD teaching targets inengineering concerns the development of attitudes to assess projects and related impacts in a systemic way, the development of transversal skills, and the collaboration between experts from different fields to facilitate sustainable decisions. These assumptions can be linked tothe qualities required by the Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board [2].What kind of student exercises relies on all these assumptions? As teaching assistants (TA) in the class Environmental Design and Life Cycle Thinking (GCH2220-Polytechnique Montreal), we propose a possible answer. The main goals of this class are to familiarize students with the concepts of environmental design and life cycle thinking, as well as with different existing tools to apply these concepts. As TAs, we are in charge of a project that aims at providing students an opportunity to acquire practical aspects.The subject of the project presented is the environmental redesign of coated paper production, andits main objectives are: to improve teamwork skills, todevelop critical thinking when analyzing the results of an environmental assessment, and to develop skills to convince people within a company to adopt environmental solutions. In order to achieve these goals, the project was built on four main steps and students are evaluated through two reports and a poster presentation. Teams of four students were formed in order to mix students with different backgrounds (types of engineering programs, amount of credits completed) and obtain multidisciplinary teams. The project, the way it is presented in class, and its relevance for the students as future engineers are assessed through a survey in order to improve the exercise for the following classes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".