MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2346812050 · doi:10.1080/13504622.2016.1182627

Living well in a world with wolves: educators’ perspectives

2016· article· en· W2346812050 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Gail J. Kuhl

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Education Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Education and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaLakehead University
KeywordsEnvironmental educationOutdoor educationPedagogySociologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this qualitative, phenomenological investigation was to explore
\nwolf-focused education from the perspective of educators who work at various wolf
\neducation centres and programs around North America. The research question was:
\nWhat are the experiences of educators who work at programs that feature captive or wild
\nwolves; in particular, what do these educators learn through both working with and
\nteaching about wolves? The research sought: to better understand the learning that
\nemerges from direct experiences humans have with other animals, in this case wolves; to
\nfill a gap in the research on wolf education; and to explore and understand some of the
\nethical aspects of wolf education and wolf conservation from the perspective of
\neducators. Using a phenomenological methodology that drew from critical theory,
\nmethods included 16 in-depth semi-structured interviews with 17 educators from 15
\ndifferent wolf programs around North America, a brief content analysis of the programs?
\nwebsites, and observations of two wolf programs. Topics discussed with the educators
\nincluded the purpose of their work, their ideas about how best to educate the public about
\nwolves, their own ideas about wolves including what they had learned through observing
\nand working with wolves, and their thoughts on wild wolf management and conservation.
\nWhen it came to the experience of being a wolf educator certain motifs emerged that help
\nelucidate the experience: the significance of political, regional, and cultural contexts; the
\nkey role that scientific knowledge and learning has for many wolf educators; the
\nimportance of ethics to the educators when it comes to teaching about and working with
\ncaptive or wild wolves; the impact of direct experiences with wolves on how educators
\nunderstand and feel about wolves; and finally, their engagement with conservation issues.
\nThis research highlights the importance of education as one strategy for wolf
\nconservation, especially if it does not shy away from the messiness of controversial
\nconservation issues and helps people grapple with the social, ethical, regional, and
\ncultural aspects of knowing wolves and our relationships as humans with them.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0680.004

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.308 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Education ResearchSame topicEnvironmental Education and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207