MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332952891 · doi:10.1080/00958964.2015.1092934

Ruling relationships in sustainable development and education for sustainable development

2016· article· en· W2332952891 on OpenAlexaff
Tom Berryman, Lucie Sauvé

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Environmental Education · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Education and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainable developmentEducation for sustainable developmentUnderpinningEnvironmental educationConversationEnvironmental ethicsDiversity (politics)SociologyPolitical scienceEconomic growthPedagogyEconomicsLawEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is from historical perspectives on more than 40 years of environment related education theories, practices, and policies that we revisit what might otherwise become a tired conversation about environmental education and sustainable development. Our contemporary critical analysis of Stefan Bengtsson's research about policy making leads us to different interpretations of some key observations and assertions about sustainable development (SD) and education for sustainable development (ESD). To counter the persistent weight of the underpinning resourcist and economic view of the relationship between people and the environment, we examine other perspectives about economy, about people and society, and about the environment. These divergences insist upon diversity in education and in environmental education.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.078
Scholarly communication0.0110.012
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0050.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations63
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Environmental EducationSame topicEnvironmental Education and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207