MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405674771 · doi:10.24908/pceea.2024.18558

Enhancing Diversity, Skills Development, and Interest in STEM Education through Ontario Tech's Engineering Outreach Programs

2024· article· en· W4405674771 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Qusay H. Mahmoud, Laura Thursby, Hossam A. Kishawy, Kimberly M. Davis, Ellen Istvan

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Curriculum Development
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOutreachDiversity (politics)Engineering educationEngineering managementEngineeringPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ontario Tech University’s Engineering Outreach programs annually involve over 30,000 young individuals in STEM workshops and events, targeting young women and other groups historically underrepresented in STEM to encourage their pursuit of Engineering careers. This paper examines the effectiveness of these efforts and evaluates our outreach programs' impact on increasing participation and opportunities for youth underrepresented in STEM fields. While long-term outcomes like career influence are challenging to measure, our initial findings indicate a heightened interest and improved access for underrepresented groups in STEM education. These early outcomes suggest a considerable shift in perceptions regarding Engineering as an appealing and viable career path for underserved populations, reinforcing our belief in the substantial positive influence of our outreach programming and initiatives. The culmination of these findings provides compelling evidence to support the notion that Engineering Outreach effectively shapes positive perceptions and fosters interest in STEM education, particularly among demographics traditionally underrepresented in STEM fields.

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 score0.792
Threshold uncertainty score0.414

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.191
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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