MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7133043742

Engineering and Humanities Intersections

2024· dissertation· W7133043742 on OpenAlexaff
Lydia Alice Wilkinson

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2024
Typedissertation
Language
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicInterdisciplinary Research and Collaboration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMindsetCurriculumEngineering educationSociotechnical systemInclusion (mineral)The artsWork (physics)Qualitative research
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Integrating pedagogies from the humanities into engineering curricula can help students communicate, collaborate and situate their technical learning in broader social and cultural contexts, supporting their success as future professionals working in complex sociotechnical environments. There is a large body of literature that argues for such an interdisciplinary, liberal arts education, providing reasons to believe that transdisciplinary competencies improve a student’s problem-solving readiness, promote an ethical mindset and encourage the inclusion of multiple perspectives and epistemologies. However, these arguments for integration are often theoretical or aspirational, supported by minimal in-depth qualitative research into how specific outcomes are achieved by these experiences. My dissertation project addresses this shortcoming by studying the experience of engineering students working with pedagogical tools from Theatre & Performance Studies, exploiting my position as an educator and researcher at the intersection of these fields. My project analyzes three sites: a theatre course for engineering students, a science communication course for Engineering students that uses the tools of performance analysis, and a student-led theatre revue. I adopted a grounded theory approach to collect and analyze site observations, semi-structured interviews, course materials and student work at these intersections. This analysis was guided by three questions: 1. How might interdisciplinary pedagogical approaches to engineering education such as those from Theatre and Performance Studies disrupt or challenge engineering epistemologies and student mindsets?2. What can such disruptive pedagogical approaches reveal about the relationship between classroom environment—both physical and in terms of community—and student learning? 3. How do students understand the impact of those approaches, especially as it pertains to their futures in engineering? Adopting a narrative inquiry approach to my data, my analyses explore affordances and enabling pedagogies from across the three sites. By grounding the analysis in this qualitative data, my study moves beyond the conventionally cited “benefits” of interdisciplinary learning in the field, such as greater communication or collaboration skills, to identify some new important thematic concerns: building community, promoting contingency and relativism, ethical practice, and opportunities for professional and personal reflection.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.291
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.372 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicInterdisciplinary Research and CollaborationFrench-language works237,207