Software Engineering Through Community-Engaged Learning and an Inclusive Network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Retaining diverse, underrepresented students in computer science and software engineering programs is a significant concern for universities. In this chapter, we describe the INSPIRE: STEM for Social Impact program at the University of Victoria, Canada, which leverages the three principles of self-determination theory competence, relatedness, and autonomy in the design of strategies to empower women and other underrepresented groups in using software and other engineering solutions to approach sustainability, community-driven problems. We also describe lessons learned from a first successful year that involved over 30 students, 6 community partners (sustainability problem owners), and over 20 industry and academic mentors and reached out to more than 200 solution end users in our communities. Finally, we provide recommendations for universities and organizations who may want to adopt our approach. In the program 24 diverse students (in terms of gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, academic standing, and background) divided into six teams paired with six community partners worked on solving society impactful problems and developed solutions for a number of respective community partners. Each team was supported by an experienced upper year student and mentors from industry and community throughout the program. The experiential learning approach of the program allowed the students to learn a variety of soft and technical skills while developing a solution that has a social and/or environmental impact. Having a diverse team and creating a solution for real end users motivated the students to actively collaborate with their peers, community partners, and mentors resulting in the development of an inclusive network. A network of like minded people is crucial in empowering underrepresented individuals and inspiring them to remain in the computer science and software engineering fields.
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 | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.020 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".