Proposing a Multi-Stakeholder Lens to Examine Global Community-Based Design Projects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One implementation of global, community-based, engineering-student design projects invites students to practice design from a distance. Though it may not be possible to bring an entire engineering design class to the international location for students and various stakeholders to interact, a meaningful global experience can be educational and beneficial for all stakeholders. Recognizing that the impact of community-based projects extends beyond the students to numerous stakeholders, this paper proposes a multi-stakeholder lens which examines the roles, interactions, motivations, and responsibilities of stakeholders in a global, community-based design project. The lens was developed in part by a case study of a global design project connecting a first-year Canadian engineering design course, a rural Kenyan preschool, a non-profit organization, and additional Kenyan and Canadian stakeholders. Written by three of the stakeholders in the case study, the course instructor, a Canada-based community partner, and a design student, this paper concludes with recommendations on how to incorporate global projects in a domestic setting. Ultimately, adopting a multi-stakeholder lens transitions a myopic student-centric focus to an inclusive experience for all stakeholders, creating partners in the design and achieving a greater set of objectives.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".