MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2098483198 · doi:10.1353/sgo.2006.0005

Making Sense in Geography and Environmental Studies--a Student's Guide to Research, Writing, and Style (review)

2006· article· en· W2098483198 sur OpenAlex
Jaclyn Hall

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueSoutheastern geographer · 2006
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueHistorical Geography and Geographical Thought
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésKnightStyle (visual arts)PoliticsCultural geographyInstitutionSociologyWriting styleEnvironmental studiesSocial scienceHuman geographyGeographyMedia studiesPolitical scienceArtLawLiteratureArchaeology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Making Sense in Geography and Environmental Studies—a Student's Guide to Research, Writing, and Style Jaclyn Hall Making Sense in Geography and Environmental Studies—a Student's Guide to Research, Writing, and Style Margot Northey and David B. Knight. Oxford University Press, ON Canada, 2005. 264 pp, $19.95 paper (ISBN 0195420985) Making Sense in Geography and Environmental Sciences—a Student's Guide to Research, Writing and Style provides advice to students to overcome writer's block, become familiar with their institution's library, and to avoid common errors in writing. The title of the book implies that it is designed specifically for students in geography and the environmental sciences, and the author's claim to examine both the general precepts for effective writing as well as "the special requirements of reporting the research process and findings in the social, physical, and biological sciences" (p. ix). However, I found little advice specifically for students in physical geography or the environmental sciences, and thus I believe the title is somewhat misleading. Margot Northey is a specialist in communication and former Dean of Queen's University's Business School in Ontario. David Knight is a professor of political geography at the University of Guelph, also in Ontario, and his work focuses on territoriality and the spatial organization of society. Dr. Knight's interests are demonstrated in the examples used throughout the book. When an example is given, it is usually from the perspective of planning or political geography, and there are no examples that would appear relevant to a student from environmental studies or from the physical side of geography. While reading this book, I was frequently confused as to the intended audience. The book has many helpful suggestions, but it also brings up many concepts that may be too advanced for undergraduates. I will give several examples because this dilemma kept resurfacing. To wit, the book's fifth chapter, "Writing an Essay" assumes that the reader is familiar with the approaches of logical positivism, feminism, humanism, postmodernism, structuralism and realism; other parts of the book provide simple advice such as remembering to put your name on your paper. The explanation of deductive and inductive approaches is brief and inadequate for students new to these concepts. Nor do the authors explain why or how students should consider these concepts in their own writing and research. If the book is intended for undergraduate students, which is the impression given by the chapter on lab reports, this leaves me wondering why more advanced concepts were brought up if they were not going to be explained in a more complete manner. Making Sense in Geography and Environmental Studies does contain some very good advice, but the best advice is often buried and hard to find. Key sentences that are so good they should be bold and repeated to students, are found midway within long lists or often at the end of long sections or paragraphs. Some of these long lists of advice to students may be more beneficial as shorter bulleted lists that are more to the point. [End Page 166] The authors do not seem to have spent enough time becoming familiar with how modern students operate. This edition supposedly has been updated to include the role of computers in writing, but I think it only weakly attempts to incorporate the use of computers. Most university students use computers in all phases of writing, from searching for interesting topics to taking notes on books and articles. The authors advise students to take notes for a research paper on index cards, and they remind them to keep such notes banded so they do not get mixed up. Conversely, typing notes on a computer not only allows one to keep all quotes, notes and other information in one document under the reference of the source, but it also provides the capability to search for a certain phrase, which is invaluable in the research and writing process. The section on preparing presentations is useful and gives good advice on organizing one's thoughts. Although this section did recognize and comment on the use of slide projectors, it ignored the use of PowerPoint for presentations...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,455
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,003
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,045
Tête enseignante GPT0,395
Écart entre enseignants0,349 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle