MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308802967 · doi:10.24908/pceea.vi.15856

What about sustainability? Adding the “S” to leadership and management competency development in the engineering curriculum

2022· article· en· W4308802967 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Nadine Ibrahim, Marnie Jamieson, John Donald

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Curriculum Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityAccreditationCurriculumEngineering ethicsContext (archaeology)Engineering managementEngineering educationEngineeringLeadership developmentSustainable developmentComputer scienceKnowledge managementPolitical scienceSociologyPedagogyPublic relationsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To provide a framework for engineering educators to map leadership and management skills development in the curriculum, the authors previously created a Leadership-Management Development Model (LMDM). In this paper we look to extend the model to include sustainability by using an “environmental limits approach”, creating a Leadership-Management -Sustainability Development Model (LMSDM). Adding the sustainability dimension provides a contextual purpose for leadership and management development as it relates to creating and stewarding sustainable socio-technical engineering solutions. This can set a common language and a harmonized framework in the context of skills development and application in engineering practice to complex socio-technical problems. Ultimately the model will allow programs and instructors to map and situate the development of leadership, management and sustainability concepts in their programs in an integrated manner., and to examine learning outcomes relevant to the Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board (CEAB) graduate attributes (GA). Curricular examples are provided to give insight into application of the LMSDM in engineering courses and programs. Future work will include mapping the developed LMSDM to engineering curriculum at multiple institutions.

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 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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.588
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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