MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412870767 · doi:10.24908/pceea.2025.19685

Empowering Engineering Students: A Targeted Strategy to Strengthen Mathematical Foundations Through Adaptive Learning Tools

2025· article· en· W4412870767 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicProblem and Project Based Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersUniversité de Sherbrooke
KeywordsMathematics educationComputer scienceEngineering ethicsManagement scienceEngineeringEngineering managementKnowledge managementPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board (CEAB) requires mathematical competency for engineers. Assessments at Université de Sherbrooke revealed significant gaps in students’ mathematical prior knowledge, necessitating enhanced preparation to meet CEAB standards. Purpose: This project aims to bridge first-year engineering students’ mathematical prior knowledge gaps through a self-paced educational strategy using a tailored platform, strengthening foundational understanding and abstraction skills. Approach: A three-tiered support framework was integrated as a self-paced computer-assisted platform into the curriculum alongside Problem and Project-Based Learning (PBL). It comprises a range of supplementary individual activities, including a review of students’ mathematical backgrounds, personalized learning experiences, interactive modules with immediate feedback, and continuous progress monitoring. Outcomes: Implemented in Fall 2024 for 198 students, 67.7% engaged with the platform, completing an average of 6.7 modules out of 14.8 recommended modules. Engagement was higher (85%) among students with a technical background. Feedback indicated that 76% of students would recommend the platform to new students, and 58% felt the modules were appropriately aligned with the PBL units. Conclusion: The engagement with the platform surpassed initial hopes, underscoring the significance of tailored educational strategies in effectively preparing students, particularly in mathematics, to meet the engineering challenges of tomorrow.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.744
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.291 · 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