The Optimal Model of Curriculum in the Field of Ecological Literacy Education in the Elementary Schools
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to design and validate the integrated curriculum model of ecological literacy in elementary school. To this aim, descriptive-analytical-comparative method was used in model designing phase and Delphi technique was used in validation phase. The statistical population of the study in model design included eight leading countries in the field of ecology (Costa Rica, Canada, Sweden, Norway, France, Austria, Colombia, Finland) and in the validation phase 15 specialists in curriculum as well as ecology were selected by purposeful sampling. The optimal model was designed based on the four elements of Tyler curriculum where the main elements include the purpose (conservation of biodiversity, etc.) content (combination of theoretical and practical ecological training, etc.), learning activities (activities-tasks-research-oriented As a group and) and evaluation (test of naturalistic intelligence, etc.). The validation results showed that the proposed model was suitable for curriculum studies and environmental education experts and these people approved the model at a high level.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it