MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885922116 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.9753

ENHANCING CO-OP AND CAREER DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES THROUGH A STUDENT-DRIVEN MENTORSHIP PROGRAM

2018· article· en· W2885922116 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Allan MacKenzie, Fei Geng

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsMentorshipGraduation (instrument)BachelorMedical educationCareer developmentPeer mentoringWork (physics)PsychologyPedagogyEngineeringMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract – McMaster’s University Bachelor of Technology (B.Tech.) Program has a mandatory 12-month cooperative (co-op) work experience as part of its academic requirements for graduation. To assist students in attaining co-op opportunities they must enroll in a career development credit course to equip them with vital knowledge and tools necessary to obtain and retain co-op work experiences. Students also receive ongoing support and guidance from Engineering Co-op & Career Services (ECCS) department, which connects students with employers and provides individual career counselling services. Despite this training and the availability of services, many students struggle to obtain workplace co-ops. In response the School of Engineering Practice and Technology (SEPT) implemented an undergraduate career peer co-op mentoring program as a further support mechanism to engage and motivate students. A pilot mentorship program was launched in 2014-15 for a select group of students and based on the positive response; an ongoing program was adopted and has run for the last two years. The program is formal in nature with a senior student mentor randomly matched with approximately 10-12 junior students as their mentees. To date, the program has impacted 362 second-year students (the mentees) and 36 senior students (the mentors). For the purposes of knowledge sharing, the paper will discuss the benefits of peer mentoring, the design and structure of the SEPT undergraduate career co-op peer mentoring program, feedback from participants, along with lessons learned from the outcomes of the last three years.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.423
Threshold uncertainty score0.859

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.265
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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