MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403764186 · doi:10.24908/pceea.2023.17062

Sense of Belonging in Engineering - a Survey of Engineering Students at a Large Comprehensive Ontario University

2024· article· en· W4403764186 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Leah Kristufek, Catherine Mavriplis

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsEngineeringEngineering educationSurvey researchMathematics educationEngineering ethicsEngineering managementSociologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite efforts to diversify the student body in engineering, the field continues to be predominantly white and male. Two surveys were developed to investigate factors that impact the sense of belonging of undergraduate and graduate engineering students. Questions were chosen to highlight implicit biases that are present in these populations with a focus on the perceptions of different genders. Other factors included year and program of study. The 10-15 minute survey received 288 undergraduate student responses and 111 graduate student responses with responses reflecting a similar ratio of men to women as the student population. The survey found that there were clear differences between men and women’s experiences as engineering students. Notably, women are more likely to think there are more challenges for women, visible minorities and members of the LGBTQ+ community, illustrating that their male peers are less aware of challenges experienced by women and other minority groups.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.376
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designObservational
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 routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicEngineering Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207