MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412476035 · doi:10.3390/educsci15070903

An Integrated Framework to Motivate Student Engagement in Science Education for Sustainable Development

2025· article· en· W4412476035 on OpenAlexaff
Norman B. Macintosh, Anila Asghar

Bibliographic record

VenueEducation Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Education and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutonomyScience educationMathematics educationSustainabilityPedagogyScientific literacyEnvironmental educationPsychologyStudent engagementSelf-determination theoryPolitical scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Science teachers continue to face decreased motivation, lower achievement levels, and decreased enrollment in post-secondary science programs. Teachers ask themselves this question: How do I motivate my students to achieve? Student-centered pedagogies, such as an in-depth pedagogy informed by Self-Determination Theory, can improve students’ motivation by addressing students’ basic psychological needs for autonomy, competency, and relatedness. Problem-based learning presents students with relevant situations and actively engages them in developing plausible solutions to problems. Environmental sustainability encompasses issues concerning our ecological and social environments. Teachers can focus on these issues to develop authentic problem-based learning units that offer a student-relevant pathway to improve motivation and scientific literacy. We propose a pedagogical framework, drawing on Self-Determination Theory, to promote students’ motivation to engage keenly with environmental sustainability education through problem-based learning. This framework is designed for secondary science classrooms to inform science teachers’ pedagogical practice.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.220
Threshold uncertainty score0.818

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.350 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEducation SciencesSame topicEnvironmental Education and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207