MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405675071 · doi:10.24908/pceea.2024.18612

A Teacher's Experience with Virtual Programming Lab

2024· article· en· W4405675071 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
James Andrew Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicExperimental Learning in Engineering
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersYork University
KeywordsComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionProgramming languageMathematics educationPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Here I present the experiences gained from the development and deployment of auto-graded Virtual Programming Lab (VPL) exercises for flipped class exercises in an introductory class on object-oriented programming for engineering students. Augmenting the VPL system with a unit testing framework like Java’s jUnit allows for rapid development of assessments in a manner that is consistent with engineering approaches to software development, including allowing convenient application of battery of test conditions. The integration of this assessment tool with the institutions learning management system allows for a consistent, automated, and reliable link between the assessment tool and the student grade records. Furthermore, the automated nature of these assessments, and the close ties to the learning management system make this particularly well suited to generating learning outcome and graduate attribute data at a fine level of granularity for program audits such as those carried out by the Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.006

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 designNot applicable
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 routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicExperimental Learning in EngineeringFrench-language works237,207