MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2614652633 · doi:10.18260/1-2--21875

Renewable and Efficient? Mechanical Engineering Students’ Conceptions of Sustainability and Engineering

2020· article· en· W2614652633 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
April A. Kedrowicz, Maria Blevins

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSustainability in Higher Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityEngineering educationEngineering ethicsEngineeringCapstonePolitical scienceEngineering managementComputer scienceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Renewable and Efficient? Mechanical Engineering Students’ Conceptions of Sustainability and EngineeringThe importance of sustainability to engineering work cannot be denied. Consider, for example,that in the 2011 State of the Union address, President Obama pledged that 80% of the energyused in the United States will come from clean energy sources by 2035.1 Perhaps unprecedented,we face enormous problems like global climate change, poverty, overpopulation, diminishingresources, and pollution, to name a few. The dominant view of engineers’ role in this currentstate of affairs is that of problem solver, or rescuer, such that engineers need only “design theirway out” of any problems we face as a global society. Rather than a reactionary focus, engineersmust be proactive and contemplative and foreground sustainability as a top design constraint tobe considered thoughtfully in terms of people, nature, and future generations. A focus onsustainability must be as heavily weighted as cost, aesthetics, ease of use, etc. But, if we are toget there, we must first change the culture of engineering education.Currently, engineering education treats sustainability as one of many design constraints thatlikely receives consideration in a classroom module, typically in a capstone design class. Onelesson is hardly enough to instill in students the importance of sustainability and sustainabledesign considerations. While some colleges of engineering have taken on grand educationalinitiatives to educate students about sustainability and the importance of sustainable design,2-3 westill have an uphill climb to truly transform engineering education to be more focused onsustainable, systems-oriented design and problem solving.One first step to transforming the culture is to learn how students view sustainability and itsrelationship to engineering. This is especially important since notions of sustainability andsustainable engineering are wide and varied.4 In this paper, we present Mechanical Engineeringstudents’ conceptions of sustainability and how sustainability relates to engineering. MechanicalEngineering, in particular, is a discipline representing great potential in terms of advancingsustainable solutions to our global environmental problems. Yet, the majority of design projectsreify a reliance on fossil fuels and old technologies that will continue to add CO2 to theatmosphere. Thus, it seems Mechanical Engineering offers a space for increased attention tosustainability.We surveyed sophomore Mechanical Engineering students in an energy systems design class togauge their views on sustainability and its importance to engineering. This represents thepreliminary phase of a multi-year project on organizational change in the MechanicalEngineering Department. Results from this study will help us develop a targeted, integratedcurriculum designed to teach students the importance of sustainability to engineering from asystems-oriented perspective.References1. Obama, B. (2011). State of the Union Address. Washington, D.C. January, 25.2. Hadgraft, R., & Goricanec, J. (2007). Engineering sustainability?! American Society for Engineering EducationConference Proceedings. Honolulu, HI: ASEE.3. Stattler, M. L., Pearson-Weatherton, Y., Chen, V. C. P., Mattingly, S. P., & Rogers, K. J. (2011). Engineeringsustainable civil engineers. American Society for Engineering Education Conference Proceedings. Vancouver, BC:ASEE.4. Hoffman, S. R., Pawley, A. L., Rao, R. L., Cardella, M. E., & Ohland. M. W. (2011). Defining “sustainableengineering”: A comparative analysis of published sustainability principles and existing courses. American Societyfor Engineering Education. Vancouver, BC: ASEE.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.376
Threshold uncertainty score0.302

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSustainability in Higher EducationFrench-language works237,207