MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069070139 · doi:10.1109/fie.2011.6142872

Enabling scalability, richer experiences and ABET-accreditable learning outcomes in computer science Capstone courses through inversion of control

2011· article· en· W2069070139 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Thomas E. Bihari, Igor Malkiman, Moez Chaabouni, Joe Bolinger, Jay Ramanathan, Rajiv Ramnath, Michael Herold

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicExperimental Learning in Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCapstoneScalabilityComputer scienceInversion (geology)Control (management)Artificial intelligenceAlgorithmDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Capstone courses are expected to prepare students for the “real world” by putting them into a microcosm of the real world. In these courses, students are given a problem of some complexity, and are expected to exercise and develop problem-solving skills as they address the problem. Within our Computer Science and Engineering program we have, over the past eight years, successfully scaled up the Capstone courses. Doing so has required innovative thinking about the roles of the students, faculty, and project sponsors. In this paper, we discuss issues with scaling up the components that have made this program successful. These include housing the courses in an NSF IUCRC that enable the cultivation of highly-committed industry partners, the creation of strong pre-requisite courses, careful development of faculty resources through the selective hiring and mentoring of clinical faculty, a commitment of the faculty to give up close management and control, strong partnerships with other organizations within the university to provide students greater access to resources, an emphasis on cross-team knowledge sharing and learning, and the development of unique assessment and evaluation tools so as to be able to monitor, measure and fairly assess a wide-spectrum of projects.

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 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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.589
Threshold uncertainty score0.610

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicExperimental Learning in EngineeringFrench-language works237,207