MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072496161 · doi:10.1080/13504620500169692

Barriers and pathways to creating sustainability education programs: policy, rhetoric and reality

2005· article· en· W2072496161 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

VenueEnvironmental Education Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSustainability in Higher Education
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityRhetoricHigher educationEnvironmental educationSustainability organizationsSustainability scienceAction (physics)Public relationsPolitical scienceSociologyPublic administrationEngineering ethicsPedagogyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article outlines an action‐oriented research project regarding the University of British Columbia’s engagement with sustainability. In 1997, the University of British Columbia (UBC) created a sustainability policy that suggests all UBC students should be educated about sustainability. Using data from a series of in‐depth interviews the author outlines a range of institutional barriers that impede the implementation of sustainability education including: the problems of disciplinarity, the competitive environment of the university, misdirected criteria for evaluating students and faculty, and multiple priority‐setting by the administration. The article concludes with recommendations on how to create institutional change and sustainability education programs at the university level.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.453
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.399 · 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