MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1691412475

Do As We Say, Not As We Do: The Nature of Environmental Education

2014· article· en· W1691412475 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueAntistasis · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Education and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsKwantlen Polytechnic University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental educationArgument (complex analysis)VisionSustainabilityEnvironmental ethicsPositive economicsPosition (finance)SociologyTerm (time)EpistemologyPolitical scienceEconomicsPedagogyPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Schinkel examined this difficulty in a 2009 paper, concluding that, in the absence of more wholesale changes to underlying social structures, environmental educational efforts are unlikely to result in much change. This argument is an interesting one, and it caused us to examine environmental educational literature in a new light. If Schinkel is correct, and environmental educators are sometimes advancing proposals that would leave students in the untenable position of being “islands of sustainability,” one would expect to find in the literature a number of examples wherein scholars posited visions for environmental education that depend on coming generations being fundamentally superior to the current generation. This is exactly what one finds in reviewing recent thought on environmental education. Our expectations are, to use the technical term, intergenerationally unjust.2

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.697
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.252 · 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