MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1501298044 · doi:10.1108/14676370410526242

Implementing the sustainable development policy at the University of British Columbia

2004· article· en· W1501298044 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nadine Gudz

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSustainability in Higher Education
Canadian institutionsVancouver Community CollegeUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityCurriculumInstitutionSustainable developmentHigher educationSociologyPolitical scienceEducation for sustainable developmentEngineering ethicsPedagogyEngineeringSocial scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rethinking our organisational learning processes is critical to society's transition to sustainability – a transition toward living respectfully with one another on a planet with finite resources. Presents the concept of sustainability as a central organising focus for higher education and draws on theories of organisational learning to help inform the transition. Specifically, the central case study focuses on the University of British Columbia (UBC), Canada's first university to adopt a sustainable development policy, and explores how well the policy is implemented in practice. Explores some of the barriers to effective implementation, and provides insights into why the University operates as a “knowledge institution” rather than a “learning institution”. An embedded case study examines the learning experience of the Faculty of Agricultural Sciences at UBC based on the recent transformation of its core curriculum to incorporate sustainability principles.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.926
Threshold uncertainty score0.535

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0180.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Citations66
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainability in Higher EducationSame topicSustainability in Higher EducationFrench-language works237,207