MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995747226

Sustainability Education in First Nations Schools: A Multi-Site Study and Implications for Education Policy.

2019· article· en· W2995747226 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Davida Bentham, Alex Wilson, Marcia McKenzie, Lori Bradford

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Education and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityCurriculumIndigenousSociologyContent analysisPedagogyPolitical sciencePublic relationsEconomic growthSocial scienceEcologyEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores sustainability uptake in education policy in First Nations-managed K-12 schools and analyzes the implications of barriers for practices in First Nations’ educational communities. Interviews were conducted with educators across four different Canadian schools and content analysis used to draw out key themes of analysis. Themes include educators’ articulations of relationships to land, including of a relational-legacy of living in an implicitly sustainable and respectful way. Participants also described how culturally and geographically relevant pedagogical approaches to sustainability are challenged by systemic and localized barriers. Participants perceived under-resourcing and administrative barriers to limit integration of sustainability across curricular areas, hindering educators’ abilities to develop appropriate innovative programming and resources for First Nations’ students. Success in overcoming these obstacles was described as being achieved through harnessing community resources to indirectly include sustainability in the curriculum. Implications for local and global Indigenous educators, policy makers, and agencies are discussed.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Educational Administration and PolicySame topicEnvironmental Education and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207