MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3042844085 · doi:10.1007/s42322-020-00059-2

What future/s for outdoor and environmental education in a world that has contended with COVID-19?

2020· article· en· W3042844085 on OpenAlexaff
John Quay, Tonia Gray, Glyn Thomas, Sandy Allen-Craig, Morten Asfeldt, Søren Andkjær, Simon Beames, Marg Cosgriff, Janet Dyment, Pete Higgins, Susanna Ho, Mark Leather, Denise Mitten, Marcus Morse, James T. Neill, Chris North, Rowena Passy, Kirsti Pedersen Gurholt, Scott Polley, Alastair G. Stewart, Takako Takano, Sue Waite, Dorothy Foley

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Outdoor and Environmental Education · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicOutdoor and Experiential Education
Canadian institutionsAcadia UniversityUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Sociology of Education2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Curriculum studiesOutdoor educationEnvironmental ethicsPandemicSociologyPolitical scienceSocial sciencePedagogyPhilosophyCurriculumVirologyMedicineOutbreak

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is an unusual article in that it brings together the perspectives of many on this journal’s editorial board, around the issue of contending with COVID-19. Twenty statements showcase a range of thoughts and experiences, highlighting the differences and similarities in the way the pandemic is impacting on the educational practice of outdoor and environmental education. The future is not yet written, of course, so it is worth thinking about how the current moment may impact on the months and years to come. The aim of this article is to influence and support such thinking.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.012
Scholarly communication0.0200.015
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0150.027
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations111
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Outdoor and Environmental EducationSame topicOutdoor and Experiential EducationFrench-language works237,207