MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1932012672 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.5949

Engineers Without Borders In-Canada Engineering Educational Programming – Case Study of Two Projects

2015· article· en· W1932012672 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Dena Ghoneim, Patrick B. Miller, Marc Beaudin, Anita Lazurko

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Curriculum Development
Canadian institutionsEngineers Without Borders Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCertificateGlobalizationEngineering educationCurriculumSustainabilityEngineering ethicsEngineeringEngineering managementPedagogyPolitical scienceSociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 21st century brings a number of opportunities and challenges that require the innovative capacity of the engineering profession. Many of these challenges and opportunities are shaped by globalization, which has impacts on how the engineering profession is educated and ultimately practices. Engineers Without Borders Canada (EWB) has recently completed the development of two projects that enable engineering students to develop skills for engineering practice in a globalized world These projects are based on ‘complementary learning outcomes’-areas that complement CEAB outcomes while providing a 21st century perspective.The first project is a final year technical elective focused on enabling electrical engineering students to combine the skills they have learned in other courses with complementary 21st included the application of systems thinking to engineering problems, sustainability and its relation to electrical engineering, and globalization and its impacts on engineering practice. The outcome of this course is to expand their ability to practice in a globalized world. EWB’s second program is a certificate that is aimed at recognizing students who develop 21st century skills throughout their education through curricular and co-curricular engagement. For curricular measurement, the certificate offers a framework to determine which courses enable the development of 21st century skills. The co-curricular component applies best practices for leadership evaluation from a number of institutions worldwide to effectively measure a student’s leadership experiences. The certificate both serves to encourage students to explore unique educational and leadership opportunities while also to recognize students who have invested their time in developing 21st century skills.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.214 · 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.

Study designObservational
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 topicEngineering Education and Curriculum DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207