MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028687824 · doi:10.1080/09544820512331326886

Curriculum, pedagogics and didactics for design education

2005· article· en· W2028687824 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Engineering Design · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDesign Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
FundersGazi Üniversitesi
KeywordsCurriculumCzechSet (abstract data type)Foundation (evidence)Engineering ethicsDesign educationMathematics educationEngineering educationEngineeringPedagogyEngineering managementSociologyComputer sciencePsychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A workshop on Education for Engineering Design was held in Pilsen, Czech Republic. This report outlines a view of a theoretical foundation for both engineering design and education, and a review of the presented papers and discussions. A first basis is given by six main competencies that engineers should acquire by their initial and continuing education. A curriculum structure is suggested to render design education more rational, with relationships to other engineering disciplines. This is supported by references to a set of educational variables that describe the educational processes, and by various educational theories. The contents of the presented papers is summarized, and several conclusions are presented.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.496
Threshold uncertainty score0.530

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.255 · 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