The construction of a digital platform aggregating active learning strategies for engineering education
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
Communities of practice are supporting growth, development and collaboration in various environments. A new Chair in teaching and learning at Polytechnique Montreal, focusing their activities on active learning strategies, perceived useful and relevant to build a community of practice around this widespread academic topic. To achieve this goal, they built a repertoire of active learning strategies to stimulate meetings and encourage exchanges between engineering educators.The ultimate objective is to promote the use of active learning strategies, which are more effective than the traditional ones, to enable in-depth and lasting learning. Many success factors and integration challenges concerning this type of approach have been studied and are considered and addressed with this new instrument.Francophone teachers from all around the world, will be able to share their experiences with active learning in an engineering context as well as learn from and teach to others in the community. The platform’s effectiveness as a collaborative tool will be studied and measured with an action research protocol, analyzing quantitative and qualitative data.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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