MODELING AN ABBREVIATED PRODUCT DESIGN CYCLE IN A FIRST-YEAR ENGINEERING DESIGN COURSE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
All Engineering Science students at the University of Toronto take the cornerstone Praxis Sequence of engineering design courses. In the first course in the sequence, Praxis I, students practice three types of engineering design across three distinct design projects. Previously the final design project had the students first frame and then develop conceptual design solutions for a self-identified challenge. While this project succeeded in providing an appropriate foundational design experience, it failed to fully prepare students for the more complex design experience in Praxis II. The project also failed to ingrain the need for clear and concise engineering communication, and the students’ lack of understanding of detail design inhibited their ability to make practical and realistic design decisions. A revised Product Design project in Praxis I was designed with the primary aims of: (a) pushing students beyond the conceptual design phase of the design process, and (b) simulating a real-world work environment by: (i) increasing the interdependence between student teams and (ii) increasing the students’ perceived value of engineering communication.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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".