MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308709885 · doi:10.24908/pceea.vi.15969

joys and challenges of creating a non-accredited multidisciplinary design program in a traditional engineering faculty

2022· article· en· W4308709885 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTechnology Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultidisciplinary approachInternshipFlexibility (engineering)Unit (ring theory)BachelorAccreditationMedical educationStakeholderEngineering managementJob marketPresentation (obstetrics)BureaucracyEngineering ethicsEngineeringPublic relationsPsychologyManagementMedicinePolitical scienceMathematics educationWork (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In January 2021, a new academic unit (School of Engineering Design and Teaching Innovation) was created in the Faculty of Engineering for the first time in over 20 years. After identifying needs in the job market for programs with a focus on multidisciplinary skills, the academic unit’s first task was to develop a three-year nonaccredited program, titled “Bachelor’s of Multidisciplinary Design (Internship)”. Fundamentally, the program will include core technical expertise expected from an engineering faculty but will also offer flexibility for students to explore other interests. This type of flexibility and openness may seem daunting for first year students. Therefore, example learning paths were created based on current job market trends, with more learning paths in development.
 This paper focuses not only on the development of such a unique program in Canada, considering insight provided through stakeholder and focus group meetings, but also the challenges associated with submitting this program proposal through all levels of university bureaucracy, from the faculty committees through to provincial review. While there have been questions, and sometimes doubts, that such a program could be fully developed, the program is on track to pass all levels of approval and welcome its first cohort of students for the Fall 2023 term.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.522
Threshold uncertainty score0.644

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.202 · 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