MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1772603559 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.4914

ExCEL: A Unique Approach to Providing Experiential Learning Opportunities

2013· article· en· W1772603559 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Kelton Friedrich

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomedical and Engineering Education
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExperiential learningDisciplineExperiential educationSustainabilityActive learning (machine learning)Open learningEngineering educationLearning sciencesEducational technologyWork (physics)Knowledge managementEngineering managementEngineeringComputer scienceEngineering ethicsCooperative learningPedagogyTeaching methodPsychologySociologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

McMaster University’s proposed Engineering Centre for Experiential Learning (ExCEL) is a novel example of providing a deep student learning experience outside of the traditional academic experience, and one in which experiential learning opportunities are intended to drive the development of additional learning opportunities. The ExCEL Initiative has students engaged in goal setting and fundraising, and actively involved in the design, construction and management of an engineering student centre building that will support future experiential learning opportunities for students. This integrates a diverse range of engineering pedagogical topics including open ended design, multi-disciplinary collaboration, sustainability, work-integrated learning, industry-academic collaboration, project-based learning and professional development. This learning opportunity will be analyzed on how it was leveraged and integrated to address this host of pedagogical topics through a real world project. Detailing this unique example will allow the rich learning aspects of it to be implemented by other educators in other engineering education institutions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.780

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.168 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicBiomedical and Engineering EducationFrench-language works237,207