MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3178046192 · doi:10.24908/pceea.vi0.14890

THE GRADUATE SPECIALIZATION IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION

2021· article· en· W3178046192 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Jillian Seniuk Cicek, Marcia Friesen, Danny Mann, Nishant Balakrishnan, Renato Rodrigues, Jeff Paul

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomedical and Engineering Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGraduate educationEngineering educationGraduate studentsEngineering ethicsEngine departmentSociologyEngineeringPolitical sciencePedagogyEngineering management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There has been substantial growth in the formal focus on the pedagogy of engineering in the last two decades. Formalized pathways in Engineering Education (Eng.Ed), including Master’s and Ph.D. degree programs and university departments, have been established in several prestigious universities globally, with many founded in the U.S.. Interest in Eng.Ed in Canada has also grown, but up until very recently there has only been one formal pathway for graduate research in this field. In Fall 2020, the Department of Biosystems Engineering at the University of Manitoba welcomed the first three doctoral students into the Graduate Specialization in Eng.Ed (GSEE). In this paper we discuss the motivations for, and objectives and benefits of the GSEE, and describe its development. We share challenges encountered, and opportunities envisioned, and theintentions and motivations of the three graduate students who chose this pathway. We reflect on the importance of Eng.Ed programs for the advancement of engineering education research and the development of the discipline in Canada. Descriptions of our efforts and challenges areintended to help the development of additional Eng.Ed specializations or graduate programs in Canada.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.407
Threshold uncertainty score0.759

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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