Design Days Boot Camp 3.0 – Improvements and Student Perceived Value
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Engineering design is central to engineering education and a design-focused orientation, like Design Days, can prepare students for success in first-year cornerstone design courses. The most recent Design Days, version 3.0, ran in Fall 2024 with 169 first year students in two engineering undergraduate programs. Continual improvements include a new design-focused ice breaker and two new activities: big systems game and a software activity in addition to cellphone drop. 83% of students completed a survey to understand their Design Days experience. The net promotor score was 60 with 63% promoters and 3% detractors. Median respondent enjoyment was ‘highly enjoyable’ for all three activities. Median respondent social benefit was ‘moderate’ for cellphone drop and big systems game and ‘some’ for software activity. Students identified improved understanding for several critical concepts. Continual improvements have ensured that Design Days perpetuates as an effective and valued educational orientation for first year students.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".