Razumevanje socialnega vidika trajnostnega razvoja pri mladostnikih
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sustainable development has been one of the key drivers of economic, social and environmental development over the last 30 years. In this study we have focused on the social aspect of sustainable development, which is also addressed by the fourth goal; quality education within the United Nations framework. The results of the survey of 203 students showed that students felt that they had low knowledge of sustainable development, with a self-assessed mean score of 2.36 (max. 5) and a standard deviation of 0.72. On the importance of sustainable development in society, students rated themselves better, with a mean score of 3.78 (max. 5) and a standard deviation of 0.80. The correlation analysis shows a medium-weak correlation between the variables self-assessment and the importance of sustainable development. The definition of sustainable development is not fully understood by 48% of the students, who did not answer the question or answered it incorrectly. One quarter (25%) of the students surveyed understood sustainable development in terms of environmental protection, while the social aspect was identified by 7% and the economic aspect by only 2%. The media and social networks are at the forefront of the acquisition of knowledge in this field.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".