TEAMWORK FOR ENGINEERING STUDENTS: IMPROVING SKILLS THROUGH EXPERIENTIAL TEACHING MODULES
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract – Motivated by a perceived deficiency in teamwork skills of graduating engineering students, a series of six teamwork training modules are being designed for each of the students’ first six academic terms. A careful pilot-revise-implement design cycle has resulted in the development of a number of variations of each module, catering to different disciplines’ needs for integration with the curriculum.
 The project is at its midpoint, having designed, delivered, and revised the first three modules: an introduction to teamwork, communication in teams, and team conflict. The fourth module - giving and receiving feedback in teams - was piloted in early 2017. The last two remaining modules are envisioned to cover teamwork topics at a more advanced level.
 So far, all modules have been delivered in host courses with instructors receptive to the need for teamwork training. It is observed that the modules’ success and long term sustainability depend on their ability to easily integrate with or wrap around existing course activities.
 
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it