An Exploration of the Application of Case Study Teaching of Flatwork Literacy in Professional Practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to meet the needs of high-quality development of the civil engineering industry, it is necessary to carry out corresponding teaching reforms in the level drawing course as a core basic course.The purpose of this paper is to explore whether the case teaching of leveling drawing can effectively improve students' ability of leveling drawing.By analyzing the level drawing course, the case teaching method of level drawing is designed.Students of a higher vocational school were selected as the experimental objects, and the questionnaire survey was used to understand the current learning status of the students' drafting and to carry out the teaching practice, and the statistical analysis method was used to explore the teaching effectiveness.After the teaching practice, the students' learning attitude, skill mastery and teaching satisfaction increased by 46.24% as a whole, which was significantly different from the learning status quo before the practice (p < 0.01).Meanwhile, there was an improvement of 8.52% and 5.57% in learning achievement over the pre-practice and comparison students, respectively.The results indicate that case teaching of leveled drafting can effectively improve students' learning attitudes, develop students' skill mastery, enhance teaching satisfaction, and it has a significant role in promoting students' learning outcomes in leveled drafting.This study confirms the value of case teaching of plain drawing in professional practice and has positive significance for improving the quality of education.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".