MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899368681 · doi:10.3138/cpp.2017-041

Enhancing Development of Competencies by Means of Continuous Improvement Processes

2018· article· en· W2899368681 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Public Policy · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Curriculum Development
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumTeamworkKnowledge managementContext (archaeology)WorkforceDisciplineInformation and Communications TechnologyProfessional developmentComputer sciencePsychologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pressure is mounting for post-secondary institutions to demonstrate that their students have the skills needed for the workforce, particularly in professional programs. Common expectations among professional and regulatory bodies in information and communication technologies (ICT) include professional knowledge, understanding of systematic impacts and needs, problem solving, teamwork, technology resources, modelling and analysis, programming, and self-management. This article focuses on intentional development of ICT competencies in post-secondary education. The authors present a continuous improvement model for integrated curriculum design, with activities and assessments specifically selected to develop professional skills in the context of the discipline. The approach involves building common understandings, providing examples of effective teaching practices, using data for evaluation, and implementing high-impact strategies for attainment of competencies. Activities at Queen’s University that have been supported by the authors are presented as a case study. Criterion-based assessment of authentic disciplinary tasks is shown to be effective in detecting incremental improvement in competencies, and learning gains on standardized tests were significant and meaningful for problem solving, critical thinking, and communication. The use of standardized assessment has limitations, but feedback to departments enabled learning needs to be addressed. These examples are highlighted as part of a continuous improvement model to develop competencies by tailoring curriculum and learning strategies, assessing student achievement, and using the data to inform high-impact strategies for attainment of competencies.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.334
Threshold uncertainty score0.946

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.198 · 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