MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Leveraging Diversity in Software Engineering Education through Community Engaged Learning and a Supportive Network

2023· article· en· W4383749683 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Education and Learning Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExperiential learningDiversity (politics)Competence (human resources)AutonomyEngineering educationSense of communityCultural diversityKnowledge managementComputer scienceEngineeringPedagogySociologyPsychologyEngineering managementPolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While a lack of diversity is a longstanding problem in computer science and engineering, universities and organizations continue to look for solutions to this issue. Among the first of its kind, we launched INSPIRE: STEM for Social Impact, a program at the University of Victoria, Canada, aimed to motivate and empower students from underrepresented groups in computer science and engineering to develop digital solutions for society impactful projects by engaging in experiential learning projects with identified community-partners. The twenty-four students in the program came from diverse backgrounds in terms of academic areas of study, genders, ethnicities, and levels of technical and educational experience. Working with six community partners, these students spent four months learning and developing solutions for a societal and/or environmental problem with potential for local and global impacts. Our experiences indicate that working in a diverse team with real clients on solving pressing issues produces a sense of competence, relatedness, and autonomy which are the basis of self-determination theory. Due to the unique structure of this program, the three principles of self-determination theory emerged through different experiences, ultimately motivating the students to build a network of likeminded people. The importance of such a network is profound in empowering students to succeed and, in retrospect, remain in software engineering fields. We address the diversity problem by providing diverse, underrepresented students with a safe and like-minded environment where they can learn and realize their full potential. Hence, in this paper, we describe the program design, experiences, and lessons learned from this approach. We also provide recommendations for universities and organizations that may want to adapt our approach.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.260 · 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