MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391614970 · doi:10.18260/1-2--42784

Work in Progress: Low Enrollment in Civil Engineering Departments: Exploring High Technology as a Potential Solution

2024· article· en· W4391614970 on OpenAlexaff
Alaa Yehia, Ayatollah Yehia, Sherif Yehia

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Curriculum Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork (physics)Engineering managementComputer scienceEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract There is a recurring issue of low enrollments across many civil engineering departments in postsecondary institutions. While there have been moments where enrollments begin to increase, civil engineering departments find themselves facing low enrollments at around 60% over the last five years across the Middle East and the United States. There are many reasons that could be attributed to this decline, such as low entry-level salaries, over-saturation of civil engineering graduates in the job market in certain regions, and a lack of construction projects due to the impending or current recession. Low enrollment also has an effect on the availability of civil engineers, especially in times of high demand, such as the passing of the recent US legislature on rebuilding infrastructure. However, this recurring problem alludes to an intrinsic issue of the curriculum, as researchers have discovered. The societal shift to the usage of high technology such as machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI), demands individuals who are proficient at utilizing it. However, in many existing civil engineering curricula, students are not taught programming skills that would aid in using high technology and if introduced at an early level, these skills are not utilized in future coursework. This paper aims to conduct a survey on the civil engineering curriculums of the top 100 American and Middle Eastern universities based on the QS World Ranking system. Initial analysis of the survey results indicates that the majority of universities have not considered new methods of data analytics such as ML or AI in their civil engineering coursework. Based on the results of the survey, the authors will provide suggestions on how to adapt high technology concepts to civil engineering coursework, while abiding by ABET/ASCE accreditation requirements. The findings of this paper will indicate where postsecondary universities offering civil engineering can easily adapt their curriculums to address the current low enrollment crisis, which in turn, supports future civil engineers for the world of high technology.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score0.866

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.194 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEngineering Education and Curriculum DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207