MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1950201585 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.5771

A RETROSPECTIVE: DESIGNING A CAREER DEVELOPMENT PREPARATION COURSE IN A MANDATORY COOP ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM

2015· article· en· W1950201585 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Allan MacKenzie

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education and Employability
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersDivision of Electrical, Communications and Cyber Systems
KeywordsEmployabilityBachelorMedical educationExperiential learningMultidisciplinary approachCareer developmentEngineering managementWork (physics)Engineering educationTeamworkPsychologyEngineeringPedagogyMedicineManagementSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the 2012-2013 academic year McMaster’s University School of Engineering Technology (SET) introduced a Professional Workplace Practices course (GENTECH 2PW3) within the Bachelor of Technology (B.Tech) Program. The course uses an experiential learning approach to instill key employability skills required to successfully participate and progress in today’s dynamic engineering and technology organizations. It is a second year academic prerequisite before a student can commence the B.Tech Program mandatory 12 month coop work experience. The course is delivered and supported by a multidisciplinary team that includes faculty members, career development practitioner, who serve as instructional assistants, and the McMaster Engineering Career and Coop Services (ECCS) department. For the purposes of knowledge sharing, this paper will discuss the GENTECH 2PW3 course structure, delivery, administration, and outcome results for 470 students from the last three cohort years.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.270 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicHigher Education and EmployabilityFrench-language works237,207