MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412870772 · doi:10.24908/pceea.2025.19589

Student experiences of interdisciplinary teamwork

2025· article· en· W4412870772 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jeffrey D. Harris

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomedical and Engineering Education
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTeamworkMedical educationPsychologyEngineering ethicsMathematics educationEngineeringMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

York University introduced the elective course "Disruptive Technology Innovation and Entrepreneurship" in Winter 2024, Summer 2024, and Winter 2025, attracting students from diverse faculties, including engineering. This course utilized interdisciplinary teams for case study analysis and hackathon-style design sprints, providing engineering students a rare opportunity to collaborate across disciplines. This scholarship-of-teaching-and-learning (SoTL) paper investigates student experiences in these interdisciplinary teams, combining document analysis of 135 students' reflection journals with manual coding and generative AI to uncover key themes and dynamics. Students highlighted connections between course-based teamwork and real-world interdisciplinary scenarios like employment and extracurricular activities. Future research, building on these preliminary findings, aims to delve deeper into the challenges and benefits of interdisciplinary collaboration across faculties. This study contributes to defining the educational value and challenges of cross-faculty student teams, informing future initiatives aimed at enhancing interdisciplinary education within higher education settings.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0020.012
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicBiomedical and Engineering EducationFrench-language works237,207