Evaluating characteristics of community riparian awareness program interactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As part of its mandate to evaluate and monitor program delivery, the Alberta Riparian Habitat Management Society (Cows and Fish) has commissioned independent evaluations to examine the effectiveness and applicability of the community-based riparian awareness and management program. The society's aim is to improve the understanding of landscape function, to better enable landowners and managers to make management decisions. The staff interaction evaluation examined staff ability to deliver certain valued characteristics, and identified whether the program and staff increased awareness and management action. Respondents rated staff highly on all characteristics. Landowners that participated in riparian health programming as part of community/watershed groups were 19% more likely to have learned new information and 21% more likely to implement management change than those that were not part of a group. Repeat interactions are critical to learning new information and influencing management. All those with frequent interactions had learned new information, compared to only 70% of those with very little interaction. A diverse array of interactions led respondents to alter their management, indicating the need for a wide variety of extension tools and activities. The results strongly support the need for a community-based approach in resource management and awareness activities, which enables repeat, ongoing and diverse interactions with extension staff.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".