MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402585789 · doi:10.33524/cjar.v24i3.675

Outdoor Play and Learning in Elementary Schools: A Critical Participatory Action Research Project

2024· article· en· W4402585789 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Megan Zeni, Leyton Schnellert, Mariana Brussoni

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Action Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicDiverse Educational Innovations Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticipatory action researchAction researchPedagogyCitizen journalismMathematics educationAction (physics)Action learningSociologyPsychologyPolitical scienceTeaching methodCooperative learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we enacted critical participatory action research (CPAR) within an online community of practice (CoP). The CoP was designed to build a community of outdoor play and learning (OPAL) practitioners. This paper describes how a cohort (n=18) of experienced Kindergarten to grade eight (K-8) teachers from across British Columbia shared their OPAL experiences and practice and the collective action taken. Regularly scheduled meetings over a six-month period resulted in dialogue that identified the need for quality resources that were accessible for all teachers. The concept of a website, developed for teachers by teachers experienced with OPAL, was initiated within the CPAR process. This article describes findings related to participation in a CPAR CoP, and the process of deciding upon and enacting shared action to support OPAL elementary school teachers.

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)0.061
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.322

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0610.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0220.029
Scholarly communication0.0100.004
Open science0.0030.011
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.605
GPT teacher head0.529
Teacher spread0.076 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Action ResearchSame topicDiverse Educational Innovations StudiesFrench-language works237,207