MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3084202838 · doi:10.1111/1467-9752.12469

Philosophical Walks as Place‐Based Environmental Education

2020· article· en· W3084202838 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jeff Stickney

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Philosophy of Education · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous and Place-Based Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnlightenmentSociologyThe ImaginaryEpistemologySpace (punctuation)Philosophy of educationEnvironmental educationField (mathematics)AestheticsPedagogyPhilosophyHigher educationLawPsychologyPsychoanalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Place-based education has a long tradition in philosophy, and has been a cherished pedagogy for many in the field of environment studies. The practice of taking students outdoors to discover nature is first traced back to foundations in ancient Greece, in the writings of local chroniclers and in the teachings of Aristotle and the Stoics, and then into the Enlightenment and Progressive movement with Rousseau and Dewey. Contemporary bases are also surveyed in the pioneering work of Orr and Sobel, and the Heidegger-inspired writings of Ingold, Tuan, Relph and Bonnett. An instance of this immersive approach to teaching is then narrated, based on the author's repertoire in conducting place-based environmental education on the University of Toronto campus. Offering sketches of the different kinds of pedagogical interventions and resources used, it is hoped that this particular case will inspire readers to develop their own album of locally developed outdoor lessons. The ‘Philosopher's Walk’ depicted is a real place in Toronto (as in Kyoto), but it is also ‘imaginary’ in the sense of being a free-space for group or independent modes of critical and creative inquiry, adopting Goethe's and Hesse's concept of ‘pedagogical provinces’ for excursively playful self-discovery.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.029
Scholarly communication0.0060.008
Open science0.0000.006
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Philosophy of EducationSame topicIndigenous and Place-Based EducationFrench-language works237,207