CO-OP EMPLOYER EVALUATION OF THE GRADUATE ATTRIBUTES: A COMPARISON OF TWO APPROACHES
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cooperative education (co-op) is animportant and mandatory part of undergraduateengineering at the University of Victoria (UVic). Becauseof this close integration with the curriculum, the Facultyof Engineering has chosen to use co-op employerevaluations of students as part of the assessment of theCEAB graduate attributes. This paper will describe thetwo employer surveys currently in use at UVic: oneadministered by the university’s co-op office andrepurposed for attribute assessment; and a second,possibly unique in Canada, designed expressly foremployer assessment of the attributes. Results arepresented from each, showing our employers tend to rankstudents highly in attributes such as Knowledge Base,Ethics and Equity, and Life-Long Learning, but lower inEconomics and Project Management. When results fromthe two surveys are combined, we find systematicdifferences between the responses from the two tools. Weconclude that caution is needed when combining resultsfrom different assessment tools.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it