Science and Engineering Education as an Anchor in the Midst of a Changing World: The Case of Covid-19
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The discourse on science and engineering education focuses on ways of preparing students, as future employees, and global citizens. While this discourse deals with the purposes and characteristics of engineering education, it tends to neglect the students’ perspectives. The purpose of this study was to provide insights into the perspectives of undergraduate science and engineering students with respect to six factors, during the Covid-19 pandemic: end-of-semester exams, financial situation, social life, extension of study duration, the future of the labor market, and how the world will look. A comprehensive questionnaire was distributed to all undergraduate students in a research science and engineering university in two consecutive academic years. Descriptive statistics and content analysis were applied. Our findings show that science and engineering students were mostly concerned about their end-of-semester exams. Their social life was the only factor that changed between the two periods in terms of the percentage of students who were concerned with it. As for the other factors, the percentage of students who were concerned about them remained comparatively the same in both academic years. The findings highlight the confidence students had during the pandemic, and demonstrate the resilience of science and engineering, especially in times of volatility.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it