MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323903874 · doi:10.1080/17518253.2023.2185108

Incorporating the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals and green chemistry principles into high school curricula

2023· article· en· W4323903874 on OpenAlexaff
Kenneth C. Hoffman, Andrew P. Dicks

Bibliographic record

VenueGreen Chemistry Letters and Reviews · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicChemistry and Chemical Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumChemistryContext (archaeology)Engineering ethicsPerspective (graphical)Sustainable developmentGreen chemistryEducation for sustainable developmentCurriculum developmentChemistry educationMathematics educationPedagogyEngineeringPolitical scienceSociologyPsychologyOrganic chemistryComputer scienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A perspective on incorporating the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UNSDG) and Green Chemistry Principles (GCP) into high school chemistry curricula is presented. The framework is based upon the Johnstone-Mahaffy model for chemistry understanding which specifically links student learning to the affective or human-centred domain. Reference is made to the origins of high school chemistry curricula, recommendations from the recent Royal Society of Chemistry survey Green Shoots: A Sustainable Chemistry Curriculum for a Sustainable Planet, student engagement practices, and studies in adolescent mental health. The origins and organization of the UNSDG and GCP are outlined, with the similarities to high school chemistry curricula illustrated. Justification for the implementation of the UNSDG and GCP is given, with a specific example presented in the context of the International Baccalaureate chemistry curriculum, and the GCP are rendered in educator- and student-appropriate language.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.573
Threshold uncertainty score0.707

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations16
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreen Chemistry Letters and ReviewsSame topicChemistry and Chemical EngineeringFrench-language works237,207