MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151885767

Utopianism and Educational Processes in the United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development

2008· article· en· W2151885767 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Heila Lotz‐Sisitka

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian journal of environmental education · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Education and Societal Dynamics
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEducation for sustainable developmentSociologySustainable developmentSustainabilityDemocracyEnvironmental educationRelativismSituatedContext (archaeology)Philosophy of educationCreativityReflexivityEconomic JusticeEnvironmental ethicsEpistemologyPedagogySocial sciencePolitical scienceHigher educationLawPolitics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent international policy literature on Education for Sustainable Development puts forward utopian concepts of sustainable development and transformed learning as objects for educational thinking and practice. This paper, drawing on three illustrative educational investigations with youth in a South African context, critically examines how we might engage with utopian concepts such as those put forward in the United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development. It incorporates an engagement with other related utopian concepts such as democracy and social justice, which feature strongly in post-apartheid societal reconstruction in South Africa. The paper argues that if we are to avoid valuable utopian concepts such as democracy, sustainability, and social justice from becoming doxic knowl- edge, a reflexive realist orientation might best guide our educational engagements with such concepts. Such an approach to utopianism would take account of contextual realities and situated learning processes, and fos- ter a creativity of action that is constructivist in nature, but not relativist.

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 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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.281
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations11
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian journal of environmental educationSame topicYouth Education and Societal DynamicsFrench-language works237,207