MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403794003 · doi:10.24908/pceea.2023.16631

Launching new sustainability-focused engineering economics modules: materials, instructor reflections and student feedback

2024· article· en· W4403794003 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Tamara Etmannski, Gabriel Potvin

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Curriculum Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityEngineering ethicsEngineeringMathematics educationEngineering managementEngineering physicsComputer sciencePsychologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

All engineering students in Canada must take an Engineering Economics course as part of program accreditation requirements. These courses mainly focus on the evaluation of monetary profits and direct financial costs incurred during the design, operation and decommissioning phases of projects. This approach, however, does not always reflect the true costs of these projects, and the modern engineer must also consider environmental and social elements when evaluating their viability or feasibility. To modernize course content and include these considerations, four new instructional modules incorporating sustainability in economic decision-making have been created and implemented in CIVL 403 at the University of Btitish Columbia as a pilot. Topics include environmental accounting, life cycle analysis, social impact assessment tools, and social and cultural capital. Student feedback suggests they value and are interested in the topics connected to sustainability, and are largely supportive of content like this being included in engineering economics courses as part of engineering training.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.009

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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