Bibliographic record
Abstract
The root of the ecological crisis lies in an ethic of nature consumption. In order to reconstruct our cultural framework, it is necessary to cultivate another ethical approach, an ethic of care. It is the responsibility of school to encourage students to learn how to care for not only the human world, but also for the natural world. This paper is based on the hypothesis that it is possible to develop the ethical disposition to care for by practising an ethic of care in the first person. In the phenomenological-hermeneutic framework, however, it is not sufficient to practice care; students have to be engaged in pondering and interpreting their experience of caring for in order to construct for themselves the meaning of their lived experience. With this in mind, I organized a year long environmental education project for students aged 6 to 10 in a rural school which involved students not only in doing things but also in thinking about their experience. Working from a socio-constructivist perspective, I made use of discussions and reflective writing. This paper presents phenomenological research on this experience.
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 | 0.006 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.003 |
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".