Ecopedagogy, The Earth Charter, and Manitoba curriculum: a critical content analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to uncover whether the Manitoba Senior Years curricula made compulsory for graduation are sufficiently meeting our needs as a province, situated in the global efforts to both tackle and adapt to climate change. My central argument is: the environmental crisis is the central crisis of our time and failure to address this will lead to large sections of planet earth, including Manitoba, being unable to sustain human life. Crucially, the United Nations has repeatedly identified education, specifically public education as humankind's best opportunity to raise a generation of ecoliterate students capable of taking on these challenges. As curriculum is developed and published by the Provincial Government in Manitoba and sets the agenda of learning in the Manitoba classroom, it is essential that curriculum address these planetary needs. This research study will research whether the compulsory and elective Manitoba Senior Years curriculum meet the criteria set by the United Nations in The Earth Charter (2000). Through a critical content analysis methodology, this thesis will detail the application of the Earth Charter as a metric to gauge the extent that Manitoba curriculum promote the ideals of creating a “just, sustainable and peaceful society” (United Nations, 2000). An analysis and nine recommendations will be presented as a way to ensure that the Manitoba Senior Years curriculum more fully aligns with the Earth Charter (2000).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".