Seeing through the lens of social justice: a threshold for engineering
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
In this paper, we have explored how students in a cross-disciplinary course on engineering and social justice approached the idea of using social justice as a lens for looking at engineering. We have used an adapted phenomenographic approach [Marton, F., and Booth, S., 1997. Learning and awareness. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum], together with Meyer and Land's [Meyer, J.H.F., and Land, R., 2003. Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge: linkages to ways of thinking and practising within the disciplines. ETL Project Occasional Report 4 [online]. Available from: http://www.tla.ed.ac.uk/etl/docs/ETLreport4.pdf [Accessed 1 January 2009]] threshold concept framework, to study the variation present among the students in the class as they attempt to pass through the threshold of this lens. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with students. We examine the liminal space that students hover in for several weeks, not knowing whether or if they will eventually pass through the portal into new territories. We found nine conceptions of increasing complexity present among the students in the class. We suggest that the students’ collective experiences illustrate potential journeys along a spectrum of liminality and through the threshold. We conclude with some implications for what can be done to facilitate the students’ transition through the threshold, thereby contributing to the development of this aspect of 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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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