aportes de la filosofía para niños y niñas a la educación ecosocial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Today, people are better informed about environmental degradation than ever before. However, this does not imply that people are more engaged toward ecological issues nor are they more committed to achieve greater ecological justice. In this respect, environmental education is paradigmatic: the current generation of young people is, by far and without any doubt, the most knowledgeable and aware of environmental problems thanks, among other things, to the presence since the end of the 20th century of environmental education in primary and secondary school. However, levels of commitment to ecological issues that are significantly higher than before are not observed, except when it comes to individual pro-environmental behavior. How to link environmental awareness with a collective, political, ecosocial and ecocitizen commitment? In order to advance avenues for reflection on this issue, firstly this article presents the elements that characterize the current ecosocial crisis. Secondly, it addresses the ecosocial crisis as a crisis of knowledge that ultimately points to the challenge of transforming the visions of the world. Thirdly, it considers the ecosocial crisis as an opportunity that opens up the possibility of creating new worlds on the planet. Fourthly, the ecosocial crisis is presented as a crisis of contemporary education. Fifthly, it summarizes the two risks to consider in the practice of ecosocial education: the risk of dogmatism and the risk of blaming individuals for global problems. Finally, some clues are proposed that point to the Philosophy for children program as a program that can support the educational practice needed by the current educational and ecosocial crisis, as well as limits recognized risks of ecosocial education.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".