CURRICULUM RENEWAL FOR BETTER DESIGN-RELATED STUDENT OUTCOMES IN SECOND-YEAR CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL ENGINEERING
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering at UBC is currently undergoing a majorcurriculum renewal with the aim of modernizing the two undergraduate programs it offers to better prepare students for increasingly diverse industries. Part of this initiative aims to introduce design earlier and integrate it throughout the programs. At the core of the new 2nd year curriculum are two new cornerstone courses: CHBE 220 and 221 – Fundamentals of Chemical and Biological Engineering I/II. CHBE 220 is taken in term 1 and replaces a previous classicallystructuredphysical chemistry course and an introductory seminar on process technology. It focuses on basicchemical process design and analysis, drawing from thermodynamics and kinetics as needed to support design topics. CHBE 221, offered in term 2, replaces a previous introductory cell biology course, and focuses on industrial microbiology and bioprocess design, drawing from cell and molecular biology and physical chemistry as needed to support design tasks. Both courses include substantial term-spanning design projects. This paper outlines the content and structure of bothcourses and their place in the updated curriculum. It describes the integrated design projects and other course deliverables. Recommendations for future iterations of the courses are also presented.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.036 | 0.014 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".