MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7020068883

The integration of real-life scenarios in architectural technology pedagogy

2025· article· en· W7020068883 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Access Institutional Repository at Robert Gordon University (Robert Gordon University) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicArchitecture and Computational Design
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidad de AlicanteCanadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics
KeywordsExhibitionProcess (computing)Work (physics)Field (mathematics)PublishingAuthentic learningArchitectural technologyActive learning (machine learning)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores the impact of integrating real-world experiences, such as publishing work for exhibition, into the pedagogical framework of architectural technology education. By engaging students in projects that require them to publish and present their work publicly, the learning process extends beyond traditional academic exercises to include practical skills in communication, collaboration, and critical thinking. This approach fosters the development of metaskills such as problem-solving, creativity, and adaptability, which are essential for professional success in the rapidly evolving field of architectural technology. The study focuses on how these experiences can enhance student learning by combining technical knowledge with a deeper understanding of historical context, building conservation, and digital and artistic applications in architecture. By researching the history of a neighbourhood or area, students gain insights into the cultural and architectural significance of spaces. This blend of historical and technological perspectives enriches their education, encouraging a holistic understanding of the built environment. Moreover, public exhibition of student work promotes confidence, accountability, and professionalism, as students engage with both academic and non-academic audiences. The findings of this paper suggest that the incorporation of such experiences not only enhances pedagogical outcomes but also prepares students for the challenges of the construction industry, while equipping them with the skills necessary to lead in areas like building conservation and the application of digital skills in architectural technology.

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)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designNot applicable
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Access Institutional Repository at Robert Gordon University (Robert Gordon University)Same topicArchitecture and Computational DesignFrench-language works237,207