MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2547427396 · doi:10.1109/iceed.2013.6908315

Assessing and evaluating students in a safety course

2013· article· en· W2547427396 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Erwin B. Daculan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Curriculum Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCourse (navigation)CurriculumQuarter (Canadian coin)Medical educationPsychologyComputer scienceEngineeringEngineering ethicsMathematics educationEngineering managementMedicinePedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Safety is critical concern for young workers about to formally enter the labor force. In the Philippines, a course on occupational safety and health was introduced to undergraduate engineering curricula around 1997. This paper discussed the methods of assessment and evaluation used in that particular course offered at the University of San Carlos for the first six years. The course was divided into four quarters with two problems to solve on each quarter. Five outcomes were expected primarily from these eight activities. Supplemental assessment methods and future activities were also enthused.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.390
Threshold uncertainty score0.359

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEngineering Education and Curriculum DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207