Bibliographic record
Abstract
This UK focussed theoretical paper builds on Harper’s (2017. “Outdoor Risky Play and Healthy Child Development in the Shadow of the “Risk Society”: A Forest and Nature School Perspective.” Child & Youth Services 38 (4): 318–334) work in Canadian Forest Schools and the role that Forest Schools play in education by including outdoor risky play. It considers the conceptualisation of a risk-averse Western society, with a focus on healthy childhood development, and the childhood risks within Forest School that are present yet arguably small. There is the opportunity to re-conceptualise ideas around risk within the Forest School space through the framing of Massey’s (2005. For Space. London, UK: Sage Publications] proposition that space is a product of relations-between and that space is always in the process of being made. Thus, children create and ‘own’ the Forest School space through their inhabitation of it. Children’s well-being and the value of risk in their lives can be understood as a fluid, dynamic and relational process within their geographies. Conclusions include a value that risk-taking has within the Forest School space. The implications of Beck's risk society, its ongoing influence on societal beliefs and practices, inducing practitioners’ fear of litigation over accidents and injury are highlighted.
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 | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.067 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.019 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".