MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4232837707 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14645010

From the Ground Up: Children's Experiences of Connecting With Nature Through Technology

2021· preprint· en· W4232837707 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Agam

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Development and Digital Technology
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityEducation and Early Childhood DevelopmentUniversity of Guelph-Humber
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumEmerging technologiesSociologyPedagogyPsychologyEngineering ethicsEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The benefits of children engaging with and in nature have been well documented in past research. However, many children today are increasingly engaging with digital technologies. Interestingly, technologies have been suggested for children to engage with and explore nature, though little research includes the ideas and insights of young children. To fill this gap in research, this study utilized a secondary data analysis approach. Data ascertained from an ongoing project that explores children‟s engagement in ecological curriculum and research was used to examine how children use technology to explore nearby nature. Prevalent themes of this study acknowledge that many children have experiences with digital technologies, digital technologies supported children in their ecological and nature based research, and digital technologies supported children‟s connections with nature. The results of this study have implications for how educators can incorporate technology into their pedagogy and for future researchers who may explore this nature-technology discourse.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.008
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicChild Development and Digital TechnologyFrench-language works237,207