MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3181132230 · doi:10.24908/pceea.vi0.14880

ONE SETTLER STUDENT’S STORY ON INCORPORATING INDIGENOUS KNOWLEDGES IN ENGINEERING CURRICULA

2021· article· en· W3181132230 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Victoria Thomsen, Jill Seniuk Cicek, Afua Adobea Mante, Shawn Bailey, Farhoud Delijani

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Curriculum Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsIndigenousSociologyCurriculumEngineering educationPedagogyEngineering ethicsNarrativeEngineeringPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The University of Manitoba Price Faculty of Engineering is actively working on initiatives to increaseIndigenous representation and ideology in engineering education. The initiatives aim to create ethical and equitable space for Indigenous Peoples, so their knowledges and perspectives are visible and valued in the Price Faculty of Engineering community. An Elder-in- Resident presented to an engineering ethics class the realities Indigenous communities face and how to work with Indigenous Peoples at the intersection of engineering projects such as oil and gas, hydroelectricity, andcommunity infrastructure. This study uses the threedimensional space narrative methodology and boundarycrossing theory to realize the impact on students’ learning. The student’s perspective negotiated and represented in this study acts as an artifact of boundary crossing and provides insight into the exchange of cross-cultural knowledge. Findings reveal a distinction between relationship and knowledge, where knowledge exchange is dependent on the relationship between people. Key factors contributing to a relationship include identifying each other’s historical backgrounds; situational contexts, and values, which require active listening; genuine curiosity; empathy; and time. The research presented in this paper is part of a more extensive case study exploring the impact onstudents’ learning when integrating Indigenous knowledges and perspectives into engineering education and is approved by the University of Manitoba’s Research Ethics Board.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.588
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.193 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicEngineering Education and Curriculum DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207