MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139037973 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.5883

MAKING CONNECTIONS WITH CASE STUDIES: A STUDENT’S PERSPECTIVE

2015· article· en· W2139037973 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicProblem and Project Based Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelevance (law)Class (philosophy)Perspective (graphical)Context (archaeology)Mathematics educationComputer scienceEngineering ethicsPsychologyEngineeringArtificial intelligencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Post-secondary engineering students havedifficulty with course concepts due to disconnect betweentheory and practice. Due to its co-op program, Universityof Waterloo students are at a unique position of beingable to put course knowledge into practice shortly afterclassroom exposure. Through the hands-on experiencegained from co-op, students are able to better understandcourse concepts. Case studies serve to replicate thepractical context provided by co-op and work, givingstudents an opportunity to see the real-life utilization ofthe concepts learned from lectures. Our exposure to casesin class greatly increased understanding of courseconcepts among my peers. Cases helped us realize thereal-life relevance of the theories learned in class,confusing information taught in class. As a case writer, Isaw the painstaking effort put into case development, toensure maximum effectiveness. Due to its ability toprovide practical application of knowledge within a shortamount of time, cases are an extremely valuableeducational tool for engineering students.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.367
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.302 · 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