MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3101445524 · doi:10.22215/cjcr.v7i1.2650

Changing the Grounds of Play

2020· article· en· W3101445524 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Meighan Mantei

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Children s Rights / Revue canadienne des droits des enfants · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChildren's Rights and Participation
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNature versus nurtureYardSpace (punctuation)PovertyIndigenousIdentity (music)Natural (archaeology)Grounded theorySociologyPedagogyTraditional knowledgePublic relationsPolitical scienceGeographySocial scienceEcologyQualitative researchAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Through a rights based framework that recognizes and advocates for children’s right to play at school, this paper will show how the students, staff and community of Kitchener elementary school created their playground revitalization project to rethink and restructure their school yard in an educational, innovative, sustainable, and culturally responsive way. Throughout the paper I will argue that the development of a natural outdoor space, grounded in Indigenous knowledge, helped the students and their community nurture a sense of place. Further, I will show how in an area filled with poverty and violence, creating an outdoor space, grounded in local knowledge, supported the community in reclaiming a positive identity. Finally, I will discuss that along with establishing a community gathering space, as the walls of the school were expanded into the outdoors, the teachers and students were given the opportunity to use the natural environment as a vehicle for learning.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.068
Scholarly communication0.0150.011
Open science0.0020.018
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.225 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Children s Rights / Revue canadienne des droits des enfantsSame topicChildren's Rights and ParticipationFrench-language works237,207