MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2492392453 · doi:10.18260/p.27331

On Becoming an Engineer: The Essential Role of Lifelong Learning Competencies

2016· article· en· W2492392453 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Curriculum Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLifelong learningAccreditationCompetence (human resources)PsychologyEngineering educationCuriosityReflexivityPedagogyAdaptabilityMedical educationKnowledge managementEngineering ethicsComputer scienceEngineeringMedicineSociologyManagementEngineering management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Similar to the ABET EC-2000 3a-k learning outcomes, one of the required attributes within the accreditation framework developed by the Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board (CEAB) is lifelong learning. It is a competency defined by CEAB as an ability to identify and to address [students'] own educational needs in a changing world in ways sufficient to maintain their competence and to allow them to contribute to the advancement of knowledge. It is an attribute that is often held up as an exemplar demonstrating the difficulties inherent in assessing the graduate attributes, particularly the ones that reflect the professional or workplace skills of engineers. Some consider lifelong learning an outcome best measured a priori: in other words, it is cogitated as an aptitude that students will best epitomize once they are graduated and working as professional engineers. However, the knowledge, skills, behaviours, attitudes and values that engender lifelong learning are indeed present in our students, and one of the most effective ways to activate and observe this attribute is to engage students in discussions regarding their experiences and perceptions of their learning. This paper presents the findings from a qualitative directed content analysis of two interviews and four focus groups, as 13 student participants discuss their learning experiences within their engineering programs in the Faculty of Engineering at the University of Manitoba, a large research university in Central Canada. Students' lifelong learning aptitudes, which are defined in this study by Deakin Crick Et al.'s seven Dimensions of Learning Power, are evidenced in the data, demonstrating both the capacity of, and the means by which to assess this attribute while students are in our programs. Additionally, we can use students' developing competencies in lifelong learning to improve our own understanding of how students transform into becoming engineers. This paper makes a case for keeping lifelong learning as a required outcome and graduate attribute for our engineering students, and advocates for careful deliberation regarding the definition of lifelong learning, especially in regards to the recently proposed changes to ABET EC-2000 Criteria 3.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score0.236

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.190 · 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