Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of our research was to develop an environmental education course for practicing teachers who requested an inquiry-focused experience that provided the opportunity to connect with and learn from the Land through garden-based pedagogies and Indigenous ways of knowing, being, and doing.In response, we developed a course in which course instructors and teachers formed a community of inquiry, and, as colearners and co-practitioners, engaged in democratic collaborative reflective practice and teacher action research.This course enabled us to develop and deepen our understandings of our environmental education praxes and provided the context to learn from, on, about, and with the Land.Specifically, we considered how school gardens could become welcoming places where living and non-living, and human and more-than-human (Abram, 1999), beings could make corporeal, spiritual, and cosmological connections through reciprocity and wonder (Carson, 1965).We engaged in democratic collaborative reflective inquiry and experienced the creation of a school garden from theory to practice, from seed to salad.Creating and participating in this course enabled us to address the needs of practicing teachers seeking environmental knowledges, understandings, and practical skills that would enable them to establish a garden with their own school communities.A
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 | 0.027 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.040 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".