MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391852925 · doi:10.1007/978-3-476-05948-2_6

A Place-Binding Knot Map. Phronêsis as Outdoor Learning

2024· book-chapter· en· W4391852925 on OpenAlexaff
Hartley Banack

Bibliographic record

VenueJ.B. Metzler eBooks · 2024
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicOutdoor and Experiential Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelation (database)TriangulationOutdoor educationField (mathematics)Reflection (computer programming)Mathematics educationVisual artsPedagogySociologyComputer sciencePsychologyCartographyGeographyArtMathematicsData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This personal philosophical reflection on outdoor learning invites consideration of wider horizons of possibility around the constructs of when and where we learn in relation to phronêsis, practical wisdom, and notions of kairós and tópos. The work aspires to re-infuse the three back into broader educational aims through practices of local learning outdoors. The treatise applies a pragmatic methodology, formed by tracing bearings based on field data gathered from life experiences, and uses triangulation techniques to bind the tracings, via the method of story-mapping, into a woven place-binding knot map. The work imagines phronêsis as leadership that may be developed at school through time spent adventuring and learning in local outdoor contexts. Local outdoors is positioned as a pragmatic means of engaging in useful learning, defined as learning for health and wellbeing, relationships with more-than-humans, and experiences. The resultant place-binding knot map, while messy, may offer insights for learners, educators, and scholars around phronêsis, kairós, and tópos in learning, leadership, and local outdoors.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.012
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJ.B. Metzler eBooksSame topicOutdoor and Experiential EducationFrench-language works237,207