MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095789693 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.3886

INTEGRATED LEARNING IN ENGINEERING - DEVELOPMENT OF THE FIRST YEAR ENGINEERING CURRICULUM AT UNB

2011· article· en· W2095789693 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Michel F. Couturier, Dawn MacIsaac, Liuchen Chang

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Curriculum Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMandateCurriculumExcellenceEngineering educationDisciplineTask forceTask (project management)EngineeringEngineering managementEngineering ethicsMathematics educationPolitical scienceSociologyPedagogySystems engineeringPsychologyPublic administrationSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following its rich tradition of over 150 years of excellence in engineering education, the Faculty of Engineering at the University of New Brunswick (UNB) is currently implementing an exciting first year program. In consultation with Atlantic businesses, governments and members of the Faculty, an Engineering Education Task Force was formed in the summer of 2003 with the mandate to enhance integrated learning in undergraduate engineering programs at UNB. The Task Force proposed a substantially-common first year program for all engineering disciplines with design projects in both the first and second terms. The design projects are used to integrate knowledge gained in the first year and are part of two new design courses. The first design course is centered on Design and Communications. The second design course is centered on Design and Computations. This new approach requires that teaching of core materials be integrated at a level that crosses disciplinary boundaries.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.159
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.161
Teacher spread0.156 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicEngineering Education and Curriculum DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207