MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2909502291 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.13012

The Development of GENE 101 – A ‘Strategies and Skills for Academic Success’ Course for First Year Engineering Students at Waterloo

2018· article· en· W2909502291 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
William S. Owen, Maria Barichello, Andrea Prier

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumMathematics educationEngineering educationDrop outTerm (time)Face (sociological concept)Course (navigation)Medical educationComputer sciencePsychologyEngineeringEngineering managementPedagogyMedicineSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a way to help ease the struggles thatstudents face in the transition from high school intouniversity, the Engineering Faculty at the University ofWaterloo started a reduced load program in 2010. Duringtheir first term at Waterloo, engineering students who arein academic jeopardy after midterms can drop twoprescribed courses to give the students an opportunity tofinish the term on a successful note. The two droppedcourses are taken during the following spring term alongwith a third course, GENE 101 – Strategies and Skills forAcademic Success. After successfully completing thereduced load terms, the students return to a full load.GENE 101 is considered a foundational success course.This paper will look at the curriculum and structure of thecourse and the impact it has had on engineering students.At the time of this writing, two groups of students who tookGENE 101 and the reduced load program have graduatedfrom Waterloo as engineers.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.168
Threshold uncertainty score0.646

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicEngineering Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207