MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1804751228 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.4848

ENGINEER LEADERSHIP IN ORGANIZATIONS AND THE IMPLICATIONS FOR CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT

2013· article· en· W1804751228 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Doug Reeve, Frieda Daniels, Cindy Rottmann, Robin Sacks, Adam Wray

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Curriculum Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsCurriculumNegotiationEngineering ethicsEngineering educationScale (ratio)EngineeringPhase (matter)Engineering managementKnowledge managementPolitical scienceComputer scienceSociologyPedagogyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Historically, Canadian faculties of engineering have excelled at developing the technical competencies oftheir students, but have been less successful at developing their communication, negotiation, and relationship building skills [4]. In this paper we discuss findings from the first phase of a large scale, mixed-methods study of engineering leadership. In particular, we are investigating:(1) how engineers contribute to leadership in engineering intensive organizations, (2) the defining characteristics of the leader-engineer; and (3) how we can use these findings to augment curriculum and instruction in engineering education.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.052
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score0.123

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.052
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.182
Teacher spread0.172 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations11
Published2013
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicEngineering Education and Curriculum DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207