MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391561494 · doi:10.18260/1-2--41430

Industry Hubs: Integrating Industry Perspectives in Design Education

2024· article· en· W4391561494 on OpenAlexafffund
Christopher Rennick, Eugene Li, Michael Lenover, Wesley Blankespoor, Sanjeev Bedi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDesign Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WindsorUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of WaterlooGovernment of Ontario
KeywordsEngineering managementComputer scienceKnowledge managementManufacturing engineeringBusinessEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Engineering Ideas Clinic at the University of Waterloo started in 2015 to expand the inclusion of real-world, hands-on design activities across the entire Faculty of Engineering. In the first stage of this development, the Ideas Clinic focused on adding formative design experiences in the form of Engineering Design Days. These activities are 2-day long design-build-test sprints where students work in teams to design solutions to discipline-specific problems. These first-year activities focus on building students' engineering design self-efficacy, and their knowledge of both the discipline, and of the process of designing. As we seek to expand our programming into second and third year, we have developed the concept of an "Industry Hub" as a way to deliberately incorporate the perspectives of industry in new activities. Including industry ensures that we are solving relevant problems and using tools/techniques/equipment that our students can expect to encounter in future careers in that domain. Furthermore, these hubs have shown to be an effective way to teach discipline specific skills in a relevant context, providing experiences to re-enforce abstract concepts. The Industry Hubs also serve as an avenue for emerging problems in industry to be explored. An Industry Hub consists of experts from one or more companies within a single engineering sector who consult with the Ideas Clinic. Internally to the university, the Ideas Clinic team consists of relevant course instructor(s), graduate students, and undergraduate students employed with the Ideas Clinic during their cooperative work terms. This combined team of both academia and industry collaboration work together to design and implement activities which are relevant to both the curriculum and to the industrial sector. In this paper, we describe the concept of the Industry Hub in detail and ground the concept in a case study of our most mature partnership: the Brock Solutions Industrial Automation Hub. The Brock Solutions Industrial Automation Hub has been operating for more than 2 years and has led to the development of learning activities with implementations in both first and fourth year to more than 500 students. Overall, students have found activities developed within the hub valuable to their development as engineers, relevant to their discipline, and they have been well received by students in both first and fourth year.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.808
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.284 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDesign Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207