Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Children, Youth and Environments Vol. 15 No. 2 (2005) ISSN: 1546-2250 Gaining Ground Dyment, Janet (2005). Canada: Evergreen; 52 pages. $free. ISBN 0973212497. Gaining Ground, written by Janet Dyment as part of her Ph.D. in Educational Studies, offers some excellent understanding of the school gardening movement’s triumphs and opportunities. The research for the monograph was done in 2003 in 45 elementary, middle and secondary schools in the Toronto District School Board (TDSB), Canada’s largest school district serving a population of 2.48 million people. 149 parents, teachers and principals took part in the study through a survey and/or interviews. The results outline the many benefits of greening school grounds as well as the challenges, including the need for on-going funding, garden maintenance, teacher support, professional development for outdoor teaching, and sufficient curriculum resources to fully develop the educational opportunities created by school grounds greening projects. 431 In light of my own experience with school gardens in three different countries, I can state that this study appears to have relevance to any school or district embarking on or already engaged in school naturalization projects. The research incorporated schools with diverse socio-economic status and multicultural populations. The findings remained consistent across this diverse mix of schools. They include: • The outdoor learning environment energized and inspired the teachers who used school naturalization or gardening projects for meeting curriculum goals. • Students showed more positive social behavior while playing and learning in “green” environments, which also translated into greater environmental awareness and stewardship. • The diverse play environments created by greening projects offered more creative and safer play spaces, and more social inclusion that engaged a broader range of students than traditional types of playgrounds. The recommendations coming from this study have broad implications for school districts beyond Toronto and Ontario. The benefits and challenges can be extrapolated to many educational settings. Gaining Ground recommends high level support of school greening through school boards and teacher education institutions in order that schools have these diverse environments as a matter of policy and teachers are trained in how to make use of the school grounds as outdoor classrooms. Further, greening projects should be funded at the school board level to ensure comprehensive master plans, long-term maintenance, and ongoing professional development for teachers. Equal access to these enriched school outdoor environments in poorer neighborhoods, where it may be more difficult for parents and staff to raise funds, depends on greening projects being embraced by the school boards as important for every school regardless of student socioeconomic status. 432 The data for this report came from questionnaires distributed to four populations at schools with greening projects: principals, teachers involved in the greening project, teachers NOT involved in the project, and parents involved in the project. The follow-up interviews happened at only five schools, chosen to represent a diverse range of socio-economic statuses. It would have been interesting to see survey results from students, but this was not part of the study. 00 percent of respondents reported that compared to indoor settings, outdoor classes increased student enthusiasm for learning. Additionally, the increased bio-diversity on school grounds enabled children to undertake science studies that in the past had only been possible on field trips. Further, teachers noted that art classes were much enriched by school gardens, as they gave students a wide array of natural life to sketch and observe. 77 percent of respondents stated that student ability to think creatively had increased due to outdoor learning on green school grounds. The interconnections between various disciplines was cited as a natural result of learning in natural habitats where students can observe specific populations of organisms in relation to each other, such as a bee pollinating a flower, or a worm at work in the compost. One teacher noted the difference in time awareness: “In the garden, though, time flows naturally so they learn naturally…they are not rushed. Learning just happens” (p. 22). A teacher and principal both commented on the fact that outdoor learning environments engage children kinesthetically offering students with that kind of orientation to learning a chance to shine. Another teacher noted “I see a real strong...
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».