MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2564913021

Sustainable Design Throughout the Curriculum Using Case Studies

2010· article· en· W2564913021 on OpenAlexaff
Steve Lambert

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational journal of engineering education · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDesign Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumWork (physics)Engineering managementSustainable developmentEngineeringKey (lock)Quality (philosophy)Sustainable designEngineering design processEngineering educationEngineering ethicsConstruction engineeringComputer scienceSustainabilityMechanical engineeringPedagogySociologyPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Case studies are presented as an option to integrate various thematic concepts such as sustainable design throughout a conventionalengineering curriculum. This approach is best with the pervasive and consistent use of cases, which in turn requires a sustainable supplyof good quality design cases covering a wide range of engineering topics. A new program at the University of Waterloo is describedwhich is focused on the development and implementation of case studies. A key innovation of this program is that cases are developedprimarily from student work term experience, through conversion of work term reports. Waterloo engineering students currentlyproduce approximately 4000 of these work term reports every year, making them a rich source of design case material. The WaterlooCases in Design Engineering program is presented and discussed, along with early results in the development and implementation ofcases.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational journal of engineering educationSame topicDesign Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207