On Being in Nature: Aldo Leopold as an Educator for the 21st Century
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper describes activities and reflections during and after a four day outdoor education course from the point of view of four educators: a philosopher, an outdoor educator, social work educator and a literacy educator. During the course, various philosophical and educational activities and ideas were put to the test, issues such as slowness, solitude, and silence were both practiced, discussed, and reflected on. After the course, reflecting on the whole experience, ideas from Aldo Leopold on conservation aesthetics are used to make a case for a certain kind of environmental education, and David Orr’s account of myths of education are used to argue for the importance of such education. To develop the ideas further, the paper discusses both recent neoliberal trends that are affecting educational systems around the globe, and also issues such as the difference between situated knowledge and representational knowledge, and the significance of language and perception for human connection with nature.
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 | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".