Exploring the Conflict Between an Engineering Identity and Leadership
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
Through the efforts of government and industry, there is growing recognition among academics of the importance of developing leadership skills in engineering students. Despite this recognition and the increasing level of resource put into engineering leadership programs throughout North America, there is currently little work that illustrates how leadership fits into the broader picture of the heterogeneous nature of engineering work. This work seeks to begin closing that gap by investigating the relationship between models of engineering identity and leadership identity. The investigation is done using quantitative techniques to draw conclusions from two data sets taken from national surveys of undergraduate students in the U.S.. Initial results indicate that while engineering students are engaged in leadership positions more frequently than their peers inother fields (other STEM and non-STEM) they see less of a connection between these roles and their future careers than other students, indicating a potential conflict between an engineering identity and a leadership identity.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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