MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121138574 · doi:10.5539/res.v7n5p17

Features of Problem-Based Module Design When Developing Professional Competencies in Bachelor Students Majoring in Radio Engineering

2015· article· en· W2121138574 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Galina Ivanovna Smirnova, Valery Georgievich Katashov

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of European Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Methods and Teacher Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation
KeywordsBachelorStandardizationCurriculumCompetence (human resources)Engineering managementEngineering educationModular designStructuringEngineering ethicsEngineeringComputer sciencePedagogyPsychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The problem is vitally important today due to the fact that problem-modular training as an effective technology of engineering education should be integrated into the curriculum, however it is implemented in a few disciplines only. The paper is aimed at applying problem-based learning in modular and competence training of bachelor students majoring in engineering. This is meant to develop professional competences in bachelor students that would be adequate for the innovative economy thus putting emphasis on students’ practical activity and evolving their engineering thinking. The design is particularly characterized by systematization of professional training challenges by standardization of production objectives and situations and offering proper solution using group learning methods. The contents of problem-based modules as applicable to bachelors’ academic training is aligned with Federal and State Standards of Higher Professional Education in the Russian Federation in Radio Engineering as well as contents structuring by integrating a number of disciplines. The paper may represent interest for specialists involved in engineering training program design in accordance with the international European standards EUR-ACE aimed at achieving the following learning outcomes: engineering analysis, engineering design, research and practice.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of European StudiesSame topicEducational Methods and Teacher DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207