MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138943601 · doi:10.1177/0973408214548382

Leaders of Sustainable Development Projects: Resources Used and Lessons Learned in a Context of Environmental Education?

2014· article· en· W2138943601 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education for Sustainable Development · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Education and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNature versus nurtureSustainable developmentEnvironmental educationEducation for sustainable developmentContext (archaeology)Plan (archaeology)Knowledge managementPublic relationsSociologyPolitical sciencePedagogyGeographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In our day, leaders involved in ingenious sustainable development projects plan spaces and implement practices that are beneficial to the environment. These initiatives represent a fertile source of information on the competences linked to environmental design that we should nurture in our students. In view of improving our understanding of the competences that should be developed in environmental education (EE), this study sought to identify the competences used by leaders who participated in five sustainable development projects (in sustainable urban planning and forestry). The analysis of documents and data from individual interviews revealed that the main competences (cognitive, social and affective) used by the leaders interviewed, depended on creative, complex, flexible, longitudinal, adapted, patient, collaborative, humanistic and environmental planning. Finally, this study, of which we present the effects on EE, shows that leaders use competences which are associated with creative individuals.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.226
Threshold uncertainty score0.912

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.264 · 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