MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122670017 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.4050

IMPROVING THE SPATIAL VISUALIZATION SKILLS OF FIRST YEAR ENGINEERING STUDENTS

2011· article· en· W2122670017 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Robert Fleisig, Anna Robertson, Allan D. Spence

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpatial Cognition and Navigation
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcMaster University
KeywordsVisualizationGrading (engineering)CurriculumComputer scienceProcess (computing)Mathematics educationGraphicsSoftware engineeringEngineeringPsychologyComputer graphics (images)PedagogyArtificial intelligenceCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spatial visualization skills are the aptitudes needed to mentally process three-dimensional images of objects. These skills are important to successful design engineers of all disciplines and are closely correlated to student performance in undergraduate engineering programmes. This paper reports on the metrics, curriculum, and teaching methods that have been implemented at McMaster University to improve the visualization skills of first year engineering students and modernize the course content of the mandatory first year engineering design and graphics course. Strong improvements in visualization test scores has been observed from the first week through to the last week of the course. To automate grading, the visualization tests have been implemented on WebCT. The WebCT-based visualization tests and results will be shared with other CDEN members upon request.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 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

Citations16
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicSpatial Cognition and NavigationFrench-language works237,207