MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4308713604 · doi:10.24908/pceea.vi.15934

Benefits of Establishing Accurate Student Learning Time Estimates in Two Second-Year Integrated Engineering and Math Courses

2022· article· en· W4308713604 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Negar M. Harandi, Carol P. Jaeger

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationScience and engineeringComputer scienceEngineering educationEngineeringMathematicsEngineering managementEngineering ethics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering and the School of Biomedical Engineering at the University of British Columbia (UBC) a system of providing and refining time estimates for student completion of homework assignments has been introduced in two integrated second-year Engineering and Math courses. Particular attention has been given to individual homework questions. In this paper findings to date are presented after two offerings of the courses in which this system was implemented. By using student feedback from the first offering to adjust instructor time estimates, instructors were able to obtain time estimates accurate to within 5 minutes of student reported averages for 77% of ELEC211 and 64% of BMEG 220 questions. Student perception of the usefulness of time estimates was generally positive, ranging from 35% to 64% of students reporting the initiative to be either ‘useful’ or ‘very useful’ over 3 years of data. Examples drawn from both courses will be discussed to demonstrate how the collected data is being used to identify areas of further improvement to assignment questions and course structure.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.070
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.070
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)→Same topicEngineering Education and Pedagogy→French-language works237,207→