MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105256243 · doi:10.5558/tfc78373-3

Learning about the forest using alternative curricula the Guelph experience

2002· article· en· W2105256243 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Andrew M. Gordon, Doug W Larson, Ray A McBride, Glen P. Lumis, Kim Rollins, Sally Humphries

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumAccreditationResource (disambiguation)Environmental educationNatural resourceMedical educationPedagogySociologyPolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The University of Guelph is a mid-sized university in southern Ontario that has many historical underpinnings with respect to both undergraduate and graduate education in forestry and forest-related subjects. Some of the earliest forward-thinking forest policies found in Ontario came from early faculty associated with the predecessor of the University, the Ontario School of Agriculture. Today, the University has numerous faculty in Colleges across campus that are involved in a multitude of teaching and research aspects associated with forested environments. The research-teaching link with respect to forestry is strong and the undergraduate population appears appreciative of this. Undergraduate courses and course segments at both undergraduate and graduate levels exist, and a minor in forest science, housed in the Department of Environmental Biology but drawing on resources from across multiple disciplines, is also available. The University of Guelph is currently evaluating its options with respect to undergraduate education in the forest sciences. Building on past and present strengths, the University is considering offering a non-accredited B.Sc. program that embraces the science and management of forests and the environmental impact and community benefits associated with interventions in the forest. Key words: Ontario forests, historical perspectives, learner-centred undergraduate curriculum, forest environments, forest science, forest and natural resource economics, internationalism, non-accredited B.Sc. undergraduate degree, graduate forest research

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.502
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207