And then I made some pockets of change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
What stories can we tell to think higher engineering education futures with? How can we imagine what practices are possible? How can we transgress what hasn’t served us, other critters, and the planet? These are questions that inspired us to develop a workshop in which we used collage-making to visualize narratives on current states of engineering education, as well as to transgress them to envision other possible futures. Grounded in Holland et al.’s (1998) theory of Figured Worlds and Lönngren and Berge’s concept of Emotional Positioning, the workshop explored figured emotional worlds operating in engineering classrooms and imagined possible futures. Here, we 1) map out the progression of the activity, 2) share examples of collages and their stories, and 3) provide multiple dimensions of reflection, discussing the uses of collages and how they prompted us to imagine, tell, and transgress stories about current and possible futures of higher engineering education. Updated with minor typographical corrections: June 30, 2025.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.027 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.026 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.033 | 0.012 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".