MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112314409 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.3812

PERCEPTIONS AND EXPERIENCE OF PARTICIPANTS IN THE INTERNATIONALLY-EDUCATED ENGINEERS QUALIFICATIONS PILOT PROGRAM, UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA

2011· article· en· W2112314409 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Marcia Friesen

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Curriculum Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationPerceptionMedical educationFocus groupQualitative researchPublic relationsPsychologyPolitical scienceEngineeringMedicineSociologyMarketingBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With increasing immigration to Canada, governments are urging professional regulatory bodies to develop new licensing pathways to recognize foreign credentials of immigrant professionals more quickly and effectively. The Internationally-Educated Engineers Qualification Pilot Program was developed in response to such pressures. The objectives of this primarily qualitative research study were to document and understand the experiences and perceptions of the international engineering graduates in three program cohorts and to apply the findings to program development and evaluation. Data were obtained through focus groups and follow-up questionnaires administered to three cohorts. Findings indicated that program strengths, which are also aligned with program objectives, include its recognition as a licensing pathway, emphasis on cultural integration, and labour market access. Findings led to the development of a comprehensive support structure for participants. Keywords: international engineering graduate; foreign credentials recognition; qualitative research.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.283
Threshold uncertainty score0.856

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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