A Report on an Ontario Secondary School Integrated Environmental Studies Program.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In secondary schools in Canada, environmental education is rarely infused throughout the highly discipline-based curriculum. The various integrated environmental studies programs operating in a number of Ontario secondary schools, however, offer an alterna-tive approach which bears some promise. In this paper, we provide a brief overview of the Ontario programs before turning to a case study of one such program, highlighting student perspec-tives. We conclude by discussing the promises and limitations of these programs, as well as constraints on their implementation. Résumé Dans les écoles secondaires du Canada, l’éducation relative à l’environnement imprègne rarement tout le programme d’études qui est grandement axé sur les disciplines. Les divers programmes d’études environnementales intégrées mis en place dans un certain nombre d’écoles secondaires de l’Ontario offrent cependant une approche alternative qui semble prometteuse. Dans cet article, nous donnons un bref aperçu des programmes ontariens et nous étudions ensuite un programme en particulier, en y soulignant les perspectives des élèves. Nous concluons par une discussion sur les promesses et les limites de ces programmes, ainsi que sur les contraintes de leur mise en œuvre. While school-based environmental education practices across Canada are diverse, it is still unusual to find environmental education infused into all sec-ondary school subjects or integrated so that the curriculum is organized not around subjects but interconnected issues and themes (Pike & Selby, 1999). More commonly, environmental education, if it occurs at all, is offered as an isolated elective course (often in science or geography) or as an extracurricular activity, and its existence in a school is frequently due to the efforts of one or
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.004 |
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".