MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951029032 · doi:10.22329/celt.v12i0.5205

A Decade of Outdoors Experiential Workshops

2019· article· en· W2951029032 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Judy Bornais, David M. Andrews, Alice Cassidy, W. Alan Wright, Marie-Jeanne Monette

Bibliographic record

VenueCollected Essays on Learning and Teaching · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicOutdoor and Experiential Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExperiential learningOutdoor educationExperiential educationPsychologyPedagogyTeaching methodMathematics educationEngineering ethicsSociologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Though much literature describes the value of experiential and place-based learning experiences for participants, we have found little comparable literature regarding the facilitator experience. This paper provides current and future facilitators of workshops, especially those that take place outdoors, our reflections and ideas as facilitators, including tips for success. Our findings reinforce the conclusion that experiential learning can be as beneficial and transformative for facilitators as for participants, and that what we encounter during workshops parallels what students may go through in our classrooms as they learn. We identify five clear themes from facilitator reflections and encourage readers to consider leading an outdoor experiential learning sessions. Keywords: reflection, facilitators; outdoor education; place-based learning; conference pedagogy; educational development S’il existe beaucoup d’études décrivant la valeur des expériences d’apprentissage expérientiel axé sur la dimension locale, notre examen a révélé peu d’études du genre portant sur l’animateur. Notre article présente des idées, des réflexions et des conseils à l’intention des personnes qui animent ou animeront des ateliers, tout particulièrement des ateliers en plein air, en vue de la réussite de ces activités. Nos conclusions indiquent, premièrement, que l’apprentissage expérientiel peut être bénéfique et peut induire des changements chez l’animateur aussi bien que chez le participant et, deuxièmement, que notre expérience en tant qu’animateurs au cours des ateliers recoupe l’expérience d’apprentissage des étudiants en classe. Nous cernons cinq thèmes issus des réflexions des animateurs et nous encourageons les lecteurs de l’article à envisager la possibilité d’animer des sessions d’apprentissage expérientiel en plein air. Mots clés : réflexion, animateurs; enseignement en plein air; apprentissage axé sur la dimension locale; pédagogie de conférence; perfectionnement de l’enseignement

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.316
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCollected Essays on Learning and TeachingSame topicOutdoor and Experiential EducationFrench-language works237,207