Mobile Garden: Seeding the Knowledge to Harvest the Sustainability in the School
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to find the prior and acquired knowledge of students along the sustainability theme reusing PET bottles for the construction of a mobile kitchen garden in the school environment. The study was developed in four steps with students of the 8th grade of the basic education of a public school of Dourados, MS, Brazil, in the period from September to November 2011. Step 1: Application of the questionnaire (1) to evaluate the prior knowledge of the students in relation to the sustainability theme; Step 2: Application of the environmental sensitization lecture; Step 3: Mounting of the mobile kitchen garden; Step 4: Application of the final questionnaire (2). By the results obtained from the questionnaire 1, it was observed that the students present very few widespread concepts and sometimes erroneous regarding the sustainability. After analysis of the questionnaire 2 applied at the end of the study developed with the students, it was observed that there was relevance in relation to the prior knowledge of the students. According to this study, the school is the adequate environment to develop practical and simple activities such as the mobile kitchen garden with PET bottles, since besides stimulating the students to practice sustainability, it contributes satisfactorily to the formation of citizens more concerned with the environment and in the construction of knowledge.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".