Defining a nature-based literacy: A research synthesis review of health-promoting literacies to promote nature engagement
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
Children and youth in contemporary western society spend less time outdoors compared to previous generations. Increased use of technology, lack of green space, and concerns for risk and safety have contributed to a generation of children spending too much time indoors. A disconnection between children and nature has occurred. Our team conducted a research synthesis review of several empirically defined non-traditional literacies (physical literacy, media literacy, health literacy, nutrition literacy, and ecological literacy) to identify common components used to conceptualize, define, and describe a new nature-based literacy. Findings included four common components: (a) Motivation, (b) Knowledge, (c) Competence, and (d) Confidence. Operationalizing nature-based literacy into a set of capability domains are described as a practical way of re-engaging children and youth with the natural world. Recommendations for future research and practice are shared.
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 | 0.015 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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