MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308713652 · doi:10.24908/pceea.vi.15887

New Academic Model for First Year Engineering Program at Capilano University

2022· article· en· W4308713652 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Mark Wlodyka, Pouyan Mahboubi, Mark Vaughan

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Curriculum Development
Canadian institutionsCapilano University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumEngineering educationEngineering managementSubject (documents)Science and engineeringMathematics educationThe artsEngineeringStudioComputer scienceEngineering ethicsPedagogySociologyPolitical sciencePsychologyLibrary science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Capilano University offers a First Year Engineering transfer program that ladders to large receiving engineering schools. As part of a larger strategy by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences at Capilano University, the School of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) and its Department of Engineering, a new Academic Model was developed to support student success in a rapidly changing education environment, as well as the modern employment landscape. The Academic model consists of four major co-active elements that are ideally suited to support the engineering curriculum, namely: Studio learning; Innovation-enabled thinking; Collaborative leadership; and Region-integrated learning. The subject of this research is to conduct an initial assessment of first-year course offerings within the Capilano University engineering program to (1) evaluate the extent of current alignment with the Academic Model; (2) the extent of potential alignment; (3) constraints to maximum alignment; and (4) opportunities to overcome constraints.

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)0.003
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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.124

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0370.008

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 head0.179
Teacher spread0.173 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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