MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2886166143 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.10200

MOVING BEYOND THE BOUNDARIES OF ENGINEERING COMMUNICATION: TEACHING MEDIA SAVVINESS TO ENGINEERING STUDENTS

2018· article· en· W2886166143 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Alan Chong

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDigital Storytelling and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEngineering educationWork (physics)Telecommunications engineeringEngineering ethicsFoundation (evidence)LiteracyEngineeringComputer scienceMultimediaPedagogySociologyEngineering managementPolitical scienceTelecommunicationsMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract – Engineering communication is most frequently thought of and taught as technical communication for academic and industrial purposes, and considered best taught in deeply integrated and discipline specific contexts. While productive, this focus neglects an increasingly important aspect of the communication many engineers will need to do in their careers – communication with and to the public.
 This paper describes an elective course for undergraduate engineers designed to fill this gap through a media literacy approach, developing a theoretical foundation for popular science communication and applying it to various high profile case studies. This approach has been effective in developing a positive learning environment within a small seminar classroom and engaging students on the topic of how their work is communicated to non-expert audiences.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicDigital Storytelling and EducationFrench-language works237,207