Symposium: Environmental and Sustainability Education in Teacher Education: Canadian Perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This symposium examines Canadian perspectives on environmental and sustainability education in teacher education (ESE-TE) through the newly published Springer book volume titled, Environmental and Sustainability Education in Teacher Education: Canadian Perspectives (2019). The book’s contributors, from diverse faculties of education across Canada, employed a range of research methods in exploring various aspects of Environmental and Sustainability Education in Teacher Education (ESE-TE). The book includes the results of empirical and non-empirical studies, including case studies, mixed methods studies, self-study and narrative inquiry, as well as theoretical, conceptual and philosophical inquiries on ESE-TE. The book volume concludes that ESE-TE in Canada depends on the determined, persevering and passionate efforts of faculty members working in varied contexts while exhibiting a fair degree of autonomy. While provincial policy directives for ESE-TE are the exception rather than the norm, the degree of autonomy that post-secondary instructors enjoy could be further supported and strengthened by consistent policy directives that help further local curriculum development by faculty members representing different curricular areas. Additional empirical research is needed to identify specific factors—including a) approaches employed in Canadian ESE-TE programs, b) theoretical frameworks informing such approaches, c) curricular emphases and outcomes implemented in these programs, and d) experiences of ESE-TE students, instructors, administrators and policy-makers—that facilitate or hinder the enhancement of ESE-TE.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.002 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".