CONTINUING EDUCATION & PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT AT GÉNIE UOTTAWA ENGINEERING
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the design and implementation of a Continuing Education and Professional Development (CE&PD) ‘intraprise’ by the Faculty of Engineering at the University of Ottawa (GuOE) that involves the active collaboration and contributions of the University’s Professional Development Institute (PDI) as well as other internal and external partners. The ultimate goal of this endeavour is to gradually incorporate CE&PD as an integral component of GuOE’s mission. GuOE has identified five (5) criteria for its CE&PD initiatives: 1. Responding to clear and validated CE&PD needs; 2. Leveraging GuOE’s expertise and resources; 3. Involving and empowering GuOE ‘champions’; 4. Developing ‘win-win’ partnerships with internal (PDI and others) and external organizations and; 5. Generating net revenue for GuOE. In order to generate the required internal ‘buy in’ and commitment, a number of CE&PD pilot projects are being undertaken. The pilot projects allow for experimenting with various forms of CE&PD offerings and intended for different categories of learners. Cette communication porte sur le développement et la mise en oeuvre d’une ‘intraprise’ de formation continue et de développement professionnel (FC&DP) à la Faculté de génie de l’Université d’Ottawa (GuOE), en collaboration avec l’Institut de développement professionnel (IDP) de l’Université ainsi que d’autres partenaires internes et externes. Ultimement, cette initiative vise à intégrer graduellement la FC&DP à l’intérieur de la mission éducative de GuOE. Cinq (5) critères ont été identifiés pour les initiatives de FC&DP de GuOE : 1. Répondre à des besoins de FC&DP précis et validés; 2. Tirer profit de l’expertise et des ressources de GuOE; 3. Identifier et impliquer activement des ‘champions’ facultaires; 4. Développer des parternariats ‘gagnant – gagnant’ avec des collaborateurs internes et des organisations externes et; 5. Générer des revenus nets pour GuOE. Un certain nombre de projets pilotes ont été identifiés afin de susciter l’intérêt et la participation de la communauté facultaire. Ceux-ci portent sur différents types de formation et s’adressent à différentes catégories d’apprenants.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.004 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".