Utveckling av samarbetsförmåga - Översikt av civilingenjörs-, brandingenjörs- och arkitektutbildningen
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Samarbetsformaga kan anses utgora en allman kompetens i likhet med problemlosningsformaga, formaga att vardera information, kommunikationsformaga etc (Bowden 2004, Barrie 2006). Gemensamt for de allmanna kompetenserna ar att de inte forekommer som separata amnen utan istallet antas genomsyra hela utbildningen (Forsberg & Reistad, 2005). Att dessa fardigheter inte kopplas till nagon specifik kurs forsvarar kvalitetskontroll och progression over utbildningen. Fragan vi vill besvara ar hur man bedomer att studenten har uppnatt denna formaga till lagarbete och samverkan i grupp? En direkt foljd av detta blir ocksa att titta pa vilka mojligheter studenten ges for att uppna malet. Forekommer det undervisning i hur man arbetar i grupp och hur ar de grupparbeten som ingar i utbildningen upplagda? Fragorna ar relevanta eftersom formagor normalt ar nagot som examineras vid studier. Ytterligare en fraga ar hur kursledaren avgor hur grupperna arbetar och om de har nagot redskap for att losa eventuella konflikter.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".