MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946841793

The Rise of Humanitarian Engineering Education in Australasia

2017· article· en· W2946841793 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSwinburne Research Bank (Swinburne University of Technology) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Learning Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)Context (archaeology)Engineering educationPolitical scienceVariety (cybernetics)Economic growthPovertyEngineeringPublic relationsPublic administrationEngineering managementGeographyEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context: Since the early 1980's, numerous organisations seeking to utilise engineering to address humanitarian and development challenges have been established including Engineering for Change, Engineers Against Poverty, Engineers for Overseas Development and national Engineers Without Borders and RedRs. This has contributed to the growth of humanitarian engineering education programs and initiatives in countries including the USA, UK and Canada from the early 2000's. Similarly, humanitarian engineering education courses and initiatives have been established in Australian and New Zealand. Purpose: This paper details the growth of humanitarian engineering education programs and initiatives in Australasia since 2006 leading to the current state of the field. From this opportunities for further growth and development will be identified. Approach: Student and university participation data drawn from national programs as well as details of current and planned university offerings is used to identify the growth in humanitarian engineering education in Australia and New Zealand. Outcomes from a collaborative cross-institutional workshop are used to identify priorities and opportunities for growth and development. Results: Although isolated initiatives have been delivered under a variety of terms, the current growth of humanitarian engineering education dates back to the launch of the EWB Challenge in 2007. Since 2015 there has been a dramatic increase in the scale of offerings and engagement with the establishment of the EWB Humanitarian Design Summits and introduction of Australian Federal Government support for mobility programs. This has led to the development of elective courses in the area and formal award programs emerging from 2016, with at least five Australasian universities offering or planning award programs. Broader impact is demonstrated by student demographic data which clearly indicates a significantly higher percentage of female engagement in the area than typical for engineering. Conclusions: Opportunities exist to continue to expand the field and its impact including educational research and development, engagement with professional bodies, and advocacy. This will contribute to leadership and the potential for humanitarian engineering to achieve positive impacts for communities and individuals in Australasia and internationally.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.776
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.353 · 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