MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Blended Learning in an Upper Year Engineering Course: The Relationship between Students’ Program Year, Interactions with Online Material, and Academic Performance

2020· article· en· W3120578522 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Teaching Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlended learningMathematics educationClass (philosophy)Maturity (psychological)Engineering educationOnline coursePsychologyMedical educationEngineeringComputer scienceEducational technologyEngineering managementMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At a comprehensive, public university in Western Canada, a fourth-year course in risk and safety management was recently made a requirement for all engineering students; depending on their program, students may take this course in their second, third, fourth, or fifth year of their program. As a result of increasing class sizes, this course was shifted from traditional to blended instruction. Since blending and opening this course to students with varying years of undergraduate engineering experience, instructors noted a difference in students’ maturity (e.g., a change in quantity and quality of in-class discussion, questions, participation, student-teacher interactions, and problem solving capabilities) and questioned whether this impacted their interactions with online material. Research examining the impact of blended learning in Engineering has primarily focused on large first-year undergraduate courses; research about blended learning in upper-year engineering courses is sparse. Studies investigating courses with students of varying years of experience in the program are virtually non-existent. Therefore, to better understand students’ interactions with online material during blended learning as connected to years in their program, we examined the relationship between levels of interaction and performance of students by year in program. This study analyzed approximately 2000 students’ interactions with online material and performance across five sections of a risk-management course in engineering. We found that students who had completed more years of their program interacted less with online material than students earlier in their undergraduate careers. Academic performance, on the other hand, was higher for students who had interacted more with online material and slightly higher for students who had completed more years in their program. These results suggest that the delivery of instructional materials may need to be tailored to students’ year in their program. Further implications and areas of future study are discussed.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.006
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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.303 · 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