MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129277048 · doi:10.1177/1541344613490997

Deepening Ecological Relationality Through Critical Onto-Epistemological Inquiry

2013· article· en· W2129277048 on OpenAlexaff
Lewis Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Transformative Education · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAdult and Continuing Education Topics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformative learningLegitimationIndigenousSociologySustainabilityEnvironmental ethicsEpistemologyEcologyPedagogyPolitical sciencePoliticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Indigenous worldviews remain at the margins of education, science, and sustainability efforts. The emergence of sustainable science holds promise as a means of advancing deep sustainability and recentering Indigenous knowledge. Transformative learning’s engagement with sustainable science has the potential to play an integral role in this paradigmatic shift which necessitates a broader legitimation of our ecology as a deeply interconnected living system. An important part of this project is learner-centred critical onto-epistemological inquiry—the critical study of one’s own reality and implications for ecological relationship. Drawing on Intuitive Inquiry and Kaupapa Māori research, this article illuminates the partial decolonization of my own Life-World and arrival at a deepened sense of ecological relationship. Initially focusing on “the dreaming,” it integrates my visceral experiences of the land and Indigenous constructions of reality through interviews with Ngāi Te Rangi and Plains Cree elders. The implications for transformative learning and sustainability are discussed.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.124

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.094
Scholarly communication0.0120.013
Open science0.0020.011
Research integrity0.0020.005
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.347 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations30
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Transformative EducationSame topicAdult and Continuing Education TopicsFrench-language works237,207