MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3080363713 · doi:10.23977/aetp.2020.41015

PLC Course Teaching Method Based on OBE Teaching Concept

2020· article· en· W3080363713 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lijun Wang, Yantao Liu, Qingpeng Wang, Junhao Wang, Zhenzhong Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Educational Technology and Psychology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Curriculum Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnthusiasmProcess (computing)Mathematics educationQuality (philosophy)Teaching methodComputer scienceTeaching and learning centerCourse (navigation)Active learning (machine learning)EngineeringPsychologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aiming at the problems of insufficient cultivation of learning ability of college students and weak transformation of knowledge into engineering ability, this paper proposes a PLC course teaching method based on OBE teaching concept with the goal of cultivating innovative talents with engineering simulation. This method adheres to the three concepts of student-centered, results-oriented and continuous improvement, and focuses on the teaching objectives of knowledge, ability and quality in the learning process of students, so as to improve the training quality of contemporary college students. Use this method to guide students to learn goal-oriented learning in the process of learning inquiry, so as to know exactly what to learn and how to learn. This paper studies the PLC course teaching method by combining concrete engineering examples and OBE teaching concept, showing that the new teaching method can not only arouse students' enthusiasm in learning theory and practice, but also achieve the seamless connection between students' classroom learning and practical engineering analysis, and further improve the teaching quality.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Educational Technology and PsychologySame topicEngineering Education and Curriculum DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207