'At that age, you just accept what things you have... you never question things': student participation in school ground greening
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children, Youth and Environments.Vol 14, No.1 (2004)ISSN 1546-2250"At That Age, You Just Accept What You HaveYou Never Question Things":Student Participation in School Ground Greening Janet E. DymentFaculty of Education, Lakehead UniversityOntario, Canada Citation: Dyment, Janet E. (2004). At That Age, You Just Accept What You HaveYou Never Question Things: A Case Study of Student Participation in School Ground Greening Projects. Children, Youth and Environments 14(1): 150-160. A growing number of researchers from various disciplines have examined the importance of including young people in meaningful ways in projects related to community development and environmental action. These researchers claim that through participation in projects such as school ground greening initiatives, young people can learn skills related to democracy, responsibility, and citizenship. Much of the research on child and youth participation in school ground greening initiatives has been conducted within a single school, making it difficult to understand the nature of student involvement across a larger number of schools. This paper reports on a study of student participation in greening projects at a school board district level, based on two methods: 1) 149 questionnaires completed by administrators, teachers, and parents associated with 45 school ground greening initiatives; and, 2) 21 follow-up interviews with administrators, teachers, and parents at five of the schools. Respondents and interviewees reported that students were involved in selected aspects of the greening projects, notably the designing, planting and maintenance. Much room exists, however, for more authentic and meaningful student participation, particularly in the problem identification and visioning phases. This paper concludes with recommendations as to how school board administrators might facilitate such participation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it