Assessing the incorporation of the soil health concept in postsecondary education in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Incorporation of soil health concept into professional practice, supported by integration into postsecondary programs, may lead to the successful maintenance and improvement of Canadian soils. The Canadian Society of Soil Science (CSSS) has identified the need to promote the teaching of the soil health concept to instructors of soil science and related courses across Canada. In summer 2023, a 37-question survey was emailed to CSSS members with the objectives of (1) gauging the understanding and interest among instructors of soil science (and related) courses across Canada in soil health, (2) describing the current status of the soil health concept in Canadian postsecondary soil science (and related) courses, and (3) assessing the need for an open access repository of educational resources focused on soil health. Survey results of 46 respondents suggest that inclusion of the concept in courses has been increasing steadily for the last 20 years, with estimated 1400 students being exposed to the concept annually in 30 courses in 6 majors, where 60% had soil in the course title. The main reasons for not including soil health in courses included lack of time and experience. Creation of a Canadian soil health repository of teaching materials would provide resources to 28% respondents (13/46) who do not include the soil health concept into their courses. Respondents indicated that the soil health concept is useful in teaching because it requires integration of a range of basic soil disciplinary concepts, a process that might be best implemented through active learning strategies.
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 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".