MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045769771 · doi:10.1115/imece2011-64975

Integration of Climate Change in the Analysis and Design of Engineered Systems: Barriers and Opportunities for Engineering Education

2011· article· en· W2045769771 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Juan Lucena, Jason Delborne, Katie Johnson, Jon A. Leydens, Junko Munakata‐Marr, Jen Schneider

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGovernment of the United KingdomColorado School of MinesUniversity of VirginiaUniversity of British ColumbiaArizona State University
KeywordsEngineering educationHealth systems engineeringSustainabilityEngineering ethicsClimate changeEngineeringEngineering management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of this paper is to begin mapping perspectives of engineering faculty on barriers and opportunities related to the integration of climate change in the analysis and design of engineered systems (CC&ES). Although both sustainability and renewable energy have been receiving increasing attention in engineering education for quite some time, climate change, especially as it relates to engineered systems, has yet to become a widely accepted topic of teaching and research. From recent literature on engineering education and from interviews with engineering faculty, a picture emerges of whether and how climate change is an important dimension in the analysis and design of engineered systems. From those sources, we begin to see what it might take to incorporate the relationship between climate change and engineered systems in engineering education, what the barriers and opportunities to this incorporation might be, and what strategies might be available to institutionalize this incorporation in engineering education. Support for this paper comes from a larger research project on “Climate Change, Engineered Systems, and Society” which has the goal to develop conceptual and educational frameworks and networks of change agents to promote effective formal and informal education for engineering students, policymakers and the public at large. The project partners include the National Academy of Engineering (NAE), Arizona State University, Boston Museum of Science, Colorado School of Mines (CSM), and the University of Virginia. Within this larger team, the CSM team is planning to develop a testbed for the incorporation of CC&ES in engineering education. Hence, our first step is to find related curricular innovations in the engineering education literature and perspectives from engineering faculty on barriers and opportunities to the integration of CC&ES in engineering education.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.140

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.016
Scholarly communication0.0100.013
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.169 · 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

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEngineering Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207