MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3182044765 · doi:10.24908/pceea.vi0.14825

Building the Engineering Mindset: Developing Sustainable Leadership and Management Competencies in First Year Engineering

2021· article· en· W3182044765 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Marnie Jamieson, John Donald

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Curriculum Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMindsetOperationalizationAccreditationEngineering educationEngineering ethicsSustainable developmentTeamworkEngineeringHealth systems engineeringEngineering managementLifelong learningPolitical scienceSociologyComputer sciencePedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The broad inclusion of sustainable engineering leadership and management concepts are increasinglyrecognized as necessary to ensure the relevance of an engineering education in a rapidly shifting world.Engineering leadership and management are integral to the engineering mindset and necessary to addressthe complex engineering problems faced by society. Examples of these complex problems can be seen in theUN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted by all UN member states, including Canada, in 2015[1]. The Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board (CEAB) identifies the need for strong non-technicalskills with a majority of the Graduate Attributes focusing on non-technical skills such as communication,teamwork, ethics and lifelong learning [2]. The UN SDGs are well aligned with the CEAB GraduateAttributes [3] and could be very effectively operationalized in engineering programs through the use of asustainable engineering leadership and management model.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.172 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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