MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127374653 · doi:10.1177/0741713607309802

Learning Through Participatory Resource Management Programs: Case Studies From Costa Rica

2008· article· en· W2127374653 on OpenAlexaff
Laura Sims, A. John Sinclair

Bibliographic record

VenueAdult Education Quarterly · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAdult and Continuing Education Topics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformative learningCitizen journalismSustainabilityParticipatory action researchCollaborative learningEnvironmental resource managementKnowledge managementQualitative researchSociologyBusinessEnvironmental planningPedagogyGeographyPolitical scienceComputer scienceEcologySocial scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based on an ongoing qualitative case study in Costa Rica, this article presents the participatory work that the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (ICE) is doing with farmers to protect watersheds from erosion and contamination. Specifically, it includes a description of ICE's Watershed Management Agricultural Programme and how farmers participate in it and a qualitative analysis of the kind of learning that participants are experiencing. ICE uses collaborative and hands-on activities to raise awareness and promote alternative environmentally sustainable farming practices and technologies. These activities result in instrumental and communicative learning as found in transformative learning theory. The instrumental learning that occurs includes acquiring skills and information, determining cause–effect relationships, and task-oriented problem solving. The communicative learning that occurs includes understanding values, concepts, and others' points of view. In conclusion, the learning that occurred resulted in transformations in the conditions of life that promoted sustainability.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.058
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Citations98
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdult Education QuarterlySame topicAdult and Continuing Education TopicsFrench-language works237,207