The role of science communication in sustainability education: the case of a university community in Northern Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Considering the experience of a university in Canada, this case study aims to explore how sustainability education is ingrained through curriculum development for science communication. Through stakeholder engagement activities with the industry, students and the Indigenous community over an extended period, the institution builds its capacity to address the concerns over environmental sustainability. Design/methodology/approach This research adopts a case study approach to examine how sustainability education is nurtured and augmented through community engagement as well as different learning, teaching and research activities within a public university in Northern Ontario, Canada. Findings This case study reveals the significant role of university faculty in facilitating sustainability initiatives embedded in their formal and informal curricula that engage the community in examining science, the causes of unsustainability due to anthropogenic activities and the relevance of indigenous knowledge, which induces insights for institutional changes toward sustainable development. Research limitations/implications This study suggests that higher education institutions interested in building capacity with complementary policy to support the SDGs should cultivate innovative curriculum development across disciplines within their educational programs, inspired by relevant research activities that engage members of their local communities for sustainability solutions. Originality/value This study reveals the role of science communication in stimulating curiosity for learning about complex issues related to environmental sustainability at a university that cohabitates with a local industry and an Indigenous community in North America.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.054 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".