MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1802549075

Engineering and Social Justice: How to help students cross the threshold

2009· article· en· W1802549075 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueChalmers Publication Library (Chalmers University of Technology) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Education and Learning Practices
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFraming (construction)Social justiceSociologyEconomic JusticeEngineering ethicsRelation (database)Mathematics educationSocial scienceEpistemologyEngineeringPsychologyPolitical scienceLawComputer scienceCivil engineeringPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reports on the interdisciplinary course “Engineering and Social Justice: Critical theories of technological practices” developed and first taught at Queen’s University by Richard Day (Sociology) and Caroline Baillie (Engineering) in 2006 in order to bring engineering and social science students together to help them develop critical thinking in relation to engineering practices while questioning common assumptions. This process was focused through a social justice lens that the students were encouraged to adopt. However, this was not easy to do for many of them and can be likened to the crossing of a threshold. In this paper, we explore the conceptual framing of the course as well as some of the crucial parameters of its apparent success in guiding students across the threshold.

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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.841
Threshold uncertainty score0.808

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.286 · 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