Growing sustainability education through community-university engagement : a case of community-based food system study at the University of British Columbia
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This action research case study investigates community-based experiential learning (CBEL) in a large undergraduate food systems course, documenting classroom innovations, highlighting community partner experiences, and offering recommendations for long-term improvement. It evaluates how the pedagogical synergy of sustainability education, CBEL, and food system study is relevant for post-secondary sustainability transitions. The case is situated in a major Canadian university, the University of British Columbia, within the interdisciplinary Faculty of Land and Food Systems. This dissertation investigates several iterations of one required undergraduate course and the development of the embedded British Columbia Food System Project (BCFSP), which includes approximately 200 students per term working with thirty community partners. This qualitative action research incorporates case study, primary engagement by the author, and semi-structured interviews with community partners to address two specific questions. First, what innovations were developed to integrate CBEL into a large course? Second, what insights did community partners share for more effective community-university partnerships? Five innovations were identified. First, student integrators who connect numerous food system projects encourage better understanding of complex issues among the many students. Second, projects spanning multiple years maximize returns from costly relationship development. Third, community service-learning alongside community-based research advances student understanding of community and project research potential. Fourth, offering workshops for teaching teams and students supports their limited experience with CBEL. Finally, engagement protocols clarify communication pathways with community partners to not overtax their time and resources. Community partner interview analysis corroborates challenges and benefits described in previous literature, and it contributes a new insight, that universities and associated communities need each other. While community partners articulated significant cultural differences between communities and universities, they see partnerships as a way to overcome perceived disparities and offer an alternative perspective that universities and communities share needs, interests, and resources. CBEL in particular offers options that are rooted in community and place. Engaging in CBEL can empower communities to demand more from universities, such that resources flow more freely, particularly from universities to communities. A final outcome is a biomimetic metaphor that accommodates the necessary networks of reciprocity, resilience, recursivity, and non-linear resource exchange.
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 | 0,001 | 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 | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| 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 ».