DEVELOPING ETHICAL ENGINEERS WITH EMPATHY
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Empathy-based skill development can help engineering students work towards professional expectations regarding ethical duties. However, there is a lack of explicit, holistic pedagogical approaches toempathy education in engineering. In BME161, a first-year biomedical engineering design course, students received explicit and implicit instruction focused on empathy and ethics. Students were also expected to use empathy-based tools and incorporate stakeholder perspectives in their design process in meaningful and explainable ways. While this approach was successful in incorporating empathybased education into a design course, a more holistic approach is needed throughout the program. Therefore, a high-level framework is presented based on four pillars of empathy development: communication, collaboration, decision-making, and values with a goal of achieving an interpersonal, user-centered, empathic culture of design in engineering students. Future work will focus on developing a more detailed and actionable framework.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it