MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1563899864 · doi:10.1017/s0814062600001725

The Decade of Education for Sustainable Development: A Useful Platform? Or an Annoying Distraction? A Canadian Perspective

2006· article· en· W1563899864 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Environmental Education · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSustainable Development and Environmental Policy
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlourishingPerspective (graphical)Sustainable developmentProject commissioningPublishingPolitical sciencePublic relationsSociologyEnvironmental ethicsEngineering ethicsMedia studiesEngineeringPsychologyLawSocial psychologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In Canada education for sustainable development is not flourishing. This may seem curious as The Decade of Education For Sustainable Development is now well underway. But this isn't a bad news story. There are interesting dynamics at play and many great initiatives are emerging. This assessment is a story too. There are many ways of interpreting events and the analysis presented here is one; there will be others. In telling this story, especially for a brief article, I've made no attempt to provide a comprehensive survey of Canadian activities. Rather, I have taken a closer look at some key events and trends and discussed ways that they might be understood.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.230
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.260 · 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