The Development Of The Competencies Liinked To The Human Dimension Of Engineering
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article describes how a group of faculty members at the School of Engineering, Université de Sherbrooke, Canada, are going about implementing a novel and fully integrated approach to developing in engineering undergraduate students the competencies linked to the human dimension of engineering.First, a critical and skeptical eye is being used to describe and assess the results of the traditional modus operandi coined "the two solitudes": "soft" courses taught by non-engineers on one part, and technical courses taught by engineering professors who are illequipped to dwelve to any meaningful depth in such topics as ethics, team work, communication, leadership, creativity, critical thinking, engineering management, etc. on the other part.This article then describes how, after an exhaustive survey of the literature, a grant from the University's Major Pedagogical Innovations Program is being used to devise ways in which the development of the interpersonal and intrapersonal competencies of engineering students will be intimately integrated throughout the whole undergraduate programs with that of the scientific and technical competencies.This entire process is under the responsibility of engineering professors.In order for this ambitious goal to be achieved, the group of faculty put together a strategic plan based on the professional aspects of engineering practice and which calls for five separate but complementary courses of action: a continuous technology watch, a research program, the design of appropriate pedagogical material, the training of engineering professors in the use of this material, the online classroom use of same material and, lastly, the publication of results.The article ends with an analysis of the results achieved so far and an optimistic look at the future that this novel approach allows to envisage.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".