MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6922254411 · doi:10.1184/r1/6624104.v1

Models for Undergraduate Project Courses in Software Engineering

2018· article· en· W6922254411 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueKiltHub Repository · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Methods and Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSyllabusScope (computer science)Software Engineering Process GroupSocial software engineeringSoftware project managementSoftware developmentRelation (database)Software

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The software engineering course provides undergraduates with an opportunity to learn something about real-world software development. Since software engineering is far from being a mature engineering discipline, it is not possible to define a completely satisfactory syllabus. Content with a sound basis is in short supply, and the material most often taught is at high risk of becoming obsolete within a few years. Undergraduate software engineering courses are now offered in more than a hundred universities. Although three textbooks dominate the market, there is not yet consensus on the scope and form of the course. The two major decisions an instructor faces are the balance between technical and management topics and the relation between the lecture and project components. We discuss these two decisions, with support from sample syllabi and survey data on course offerings in the United States and Canada. We also offer some advice on the management of a project-oriented course.

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)0.004
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.145

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0430.008

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKiltHub RepositorySame topicEducation Methods and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207