Digging at the Root of the Tree: Conceptualizing Relational Ecological Identity.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The following is based on a qualitative study conducted with two not-for-profit organizations based in Hamilton, Ontario: A Rocha and Good Shepherd Centres. Guided by grounded theory and participatory action research (PAR) methodolo-gies, my research examined Operation Wild, A Rocha’s environmental education (EE) program for adults with disabilities. In this article, I draw on participant voices from that research to respond to and extend Mitchell Thomashow’s (1996) work on ecological identity by suggesting that his conceptualization of the eco-logical self is theorized as a solely individualistic, anthropocentric concept. With guidance from literature by Indigenous and disability studies scholars, I outline a theory of relational ecological identity, which encourages the interdependent, intergenerational, and interactive components of ecological identity-building. The concept is explored by foregrounding the stories and perspectives that emerged from Operation Wild’s participants. Resume Cet article decoule d’une etude qualitative menee avec la collaboration des organismes sans but lucratif A Rocha et Good Shepherd Centres de Hamilton, en Ontario. Guidee par la theorie ancree et la recherche-action participative, cette etude portait sur Operation Wild, un programme d’education a l’environnement d’A Rocha destine aux adultes ayant un handicap. Dans le cadre de cet article, l’auteur utilise le temoignage des participants a la recherche pour repondre aux travaux de Mitchell Thomashow (1996) sur l’identite ecologique – et porter plus loin sa reflexion – en avancant que son concept du soi ecologique est strictement anthropocentrique et individualiste. En s’inspirant des ecrits de specialistes en etudes autochtones et en etudes sur la condition des personnes handicapees, l’auteur presente une theorie de l’identite ecologique relationnelle qui privilegie les composantes interdependantes, intergenerationnelles et interactives de la construction de l’identite ecologique. Le concept est explore en mettant de l’avant les recits et points de vue des participants a Operation Wild.
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 | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.052 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".