Integral Development and Educational Renewal in Saskatchewan: A Visionary Process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
“We must educate to survive, critique and create.” (Berry, as cited in O’Sullivan, 1999, p. 8) Transformative educators such as Thomas Berry, Brian Swimme, and Edmund O’Sullivan believe that the time has come for a shift away from the dominant Western educational ideology that focuses on achievement, individualism, and material success. They propose that education must become more than a system of banking information and standardized testing, and educators must be prepared to operate out of a much larger integrated worldview. They suggest that schools must provide balanced non-dualistic education that values students more for who they are than what they can achieve. In June 2008, the Saskatchewan Ministry of Education published a document which addresses similar concerns to those raised by Berry, Swimme, and O’Sullivan. The document entitled Renewed Objectives for the Common Essential Learning of Critical and Creative Thinking (CCT) and Personal and Social Development (PSD) recommends a number of key changes to existing educational policy in the areas of emotional, social and spiritual formation. The recommendations place emphasis on spiritual development, environmental awareness, ecological principles, human diversity, creative-ability development, and community-based achievement. This paper analyzes the educational need for renewal of current Western ideology and it supports the revamping of policy as proposed by the 2008 Ministry of Education document. It also discusses how the three principles of O’Sullivan’s (1999) integral development theory towards transformative education may be helpful for enhancing the effective implementation of the 2008 CCT and PSD Ministry of Education document.Keywords: integrated education; transformative education
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".