MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4403794029 · doi:10.24908/pceea.2023.17013

Increasing confidence and preparedness in incoming engineering students through a Summer Bridge Program

2024· article· en· W4403794029 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Daniela Caballero, Vincent Leung

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Curriculum Development
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsPreparednessBridge (graph theory)EngineeringConfidence intervalForensic engineeringMathematics educationPsychologyPolitical scienceMedicineStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The transition from high school to postsecondary studies entails many challenges for students. Thus, postsecondary institutions have developed Summer Bridge Programs (SBP) to support students in this transition by improving academic and psychosocial preparedness while boosting general confidence and attitude toward the university or college. The EMBER program in the Faculty of Engineering at McMaster University aims to help students entering Engineering programs succeed academically and socially. The program is divided into three parts: self-paced online learning modules, synchronous online tutorials, and four-day in-person workshops. This paper explores students’ experiences and self-reported levels of confidence and preparedness. Three anonymous surveys were administered to students participating in EMBER. The initial results show that students’ self-reported confidence and preparedness levels increased after attending EMBER. Most students valued all parts of the experience. Future research will focus on assessing the extent to which the EMBER program improves academic outcomes.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score1.000
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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