AN INQUIRY AND BLENDED LEARNING MODULE FOR SENIOR ENGINEERING DESIGN
Bibliographic record
Abstract
University of Calgary delivers a full-year “Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering Design Methodology and Application” course where students gain basic design methodology knowledge and associated skills through lectures and tutorials. The primary “vehicle” used for student experiential learning is a team-based, open-ended design project. The problem often encountered is that students fail to see “the forest for the trees”. More specifically, they often fail to see how the design process applies to their project and potentially miss the main message of the course. This paper proposes a short inquiry based learning exercise, augmented with web-based teaching modules, to more effectively prepare students for the “application” aspect of the course. Student teams will experience the full design methodology through a compressed “mini-project” at the beginning of the term, before they have any preconceived notions about the design process. Mind-mapping has been identified as the e-learning tool to organize this mini-project. A pilot project testing the use of mind-maps was conducted in a first year design course, exploring issues related to its implementation.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".