Social justice agency in the landscape architecture studio: an action research approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In landscape architecture education we often make reference to passion, to imagination and to rigour as desirable attributes in our students. But what of cultivating a capacity to care? Lynn Davies, in Building a Civic Culture Post-Conflict, urges educators to initiate a new normality of cooperation (Davies 2004, p. 243), where students are challenged to take on roles as active citizens who will challenge social injustice (Davies 2004, p. 229). In our discussions regarding the application of Davies' work to landscape architecture, we anticipated that memorial sites, because of their strong social, political, symbolic and emotional associations, would provide a transformative means of introducing students to critical issues that affect the human experience of public space. Moreover, we anticipated that the educational value of these sites could be intensified through the application of peace pedagogy. Employing a practical action research methodology we critically reflect upon the impact of the successes and failures of a landscape architecture design studio conceived in the spirit of a social action agenda of peace and commemoration.
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 | 0.040 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.044 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".