MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973292488 · doi:10.1109/mse.2013.6566701

Integrating creativity into elementary electrical engineering education using CDIO and project-based learning

2013· article· en· W1973292488 on OpenAlexaff
Emily Marasco, Laleh Behjat

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomedical and Engineering Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCDIOEngineering educationCreativityEngineeringMechatronicsMathematics educationAppealEngineering ethicsComputer scienceEngineering managementPsychologyElectrical engineeringPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microelectronics and embedded systems industries are seeking creative engineers to create new and innovative technologies at the same time as a decline in post-secondary engineering enrollment. Studies show that students may lose interest in science, mathematics, engineering and technology (STEM) as early as elementary school, believing that these areas are not innovative or creative. Using the CDIO Initiative framework for engineering education, this study looks at the development of a creative, project-based learning program called Exploring Electrical Engineering, designed to teach an introduction to electronics and electricity through integration with other disciplines, such as English, social studies, physical education and fine arts. By introducing a creative and cross-disciplinary component to STEM education, we propose to increase the appeal of electrical engineering to children who have expressed interest in other subjects, and encourage innovative, exploratory problem-solving.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations20
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBiomedical and Engineering EducationFrench-language works237,207