MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1914812737 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.5733

HOMES OF HOPE: VISUALIZING SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

2015· article· en· W1914812737 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Lauren Jatana Vathje, Marjan Eggermont, Robert W. Brennan

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicService-Learning and Community Engagement
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersSuncor Energy Incorporated
KeywordsSocial responsibilityQuality (philosophy)Work (physics)PsychologyKey (lock)Test (biology)Engineering ethicsKnowledge managementEngineeringPublic relationsComputer sciencePolitical scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A sense of professional social responsibilityis a key quality for engineers of the 21st century.Community Engaged Learning (CEL) is an excellent wayto develop social responsibility (SR) in students. But,there is a need to better understand how different typesCEL experiences impact SR development. Recently, apsychological framework and survey has been createdthat addresses how SR develops in engineers. We putthese SR tools to the test, along with some othermeasures, to see how a short-term international CELexperience impacted the students’ SR development.This study was of an exploratory nature to see how to bestwork with the new psychological framework and othermeasures of SR. All indicators showed that the short terminternational CEL had a positive impact on SRdevelopment and the SR tools proved to be useful ininterpreting and visualizing the impact on students. Ourfuture work aims to conduct many studies like this, to seeif we can understand how different types of CEL relate todevelopment of different areas of SR in students.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicService-Learning and Community EngagementFrench-language works237,207