MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2593345531 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.6478

CELBEST Project: Design and Implementation of the First Engineering Education-specific Assessment Tool for Professional Communicative Competence

2017· article· en· W2593345531 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Cristina Fabretto

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Curriculum Development
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccreditationCompetence (human resources)Medical educationCertification and AccreditationEngineering managementEngineering ethicsEngineering educationGraduate studentsComputer scienceEngineeringPsychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following the 2010 review of engineering programs in Canada by the Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board (CEAB), the Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science at Memorial University introduced a number of changes to its undergraduate program in order to align with the new CEAB outcome-based accreditation approach [1-3]. As programs’ accreditation begun to be reviewed for progress toward assessment of graduate attributes (G.A.), the 12 graduate attributes as defined by the CEAB became de facto the undergraduate program outcomes at Memorial. This paper provides an overview of the Faculty’s approach to the development and progressive assessment of communication skills as Graduate Attribute (G.A.: 07) in such a way that is aligned with CEAB accreditation requirements while taking into account the unique challenges and opportunities inherent in its program.

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)0.001
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 score0.410
Threshold uncertainty score0.744

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicEngineering Education and Curriculum DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207