MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154385426 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.3834

BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN TWO SOLITUDES - A REVIEW OF DESIGN EDUCATION IN MECHANICAL ENGINEERING AND INDUSTRIAL DESIGN

2011· review· en· W2154385426 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Brian Burns, Donald Russell

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDesign Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEngineering ethicsCurriculumBridging (networking)Design educationEngineering educationMechanical designIndustrial designEngineeringEngineering design processEngineering managementMathematics educationSociologyPedagogyComputer sciencePsychologyMechanical engineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reviews the teaching of design in the Industrial Design and Mechanical Engineering programmes at Carleton University. We summarize our approaches to design education and contrast them with the innate skills of students. Notably each curriculum puts increased emphasis on the facets of design that do not match the innate skills of the entering students. We conclude by discussing various aspects of design education as taught in the two programmes and potential mutual benefits to future design education planning.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.220 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicDesign Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207