MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6910516395 · doi:10.48336/s2yg-qw52

Understanding school food in Newfoundland and Labrador through a systems framework

2022· article· en· W6910516395 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueMemorial University Research Repository (Memorial University) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicComplex Systems and Decision Making
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFood systemsContext (archaeology)School systemConceptual frameworkSystems thinkingSustainability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using systems thinking, I address the question of how to improve school food in the province of Newfoundland and Labrador (NL). Chapter Two provides an interdisciplinary review of school food literature. This review establishes the rationale for adopting systems thinking as a conceptual and analytic tool. The systems methodology used in this dissertation is described in Chapter Three. In Chapter Four I review what is known about school food in the NL context and describe the gap to be filled by using multi-method research to answer the following questions: What school food programs and policies exist in NL? What knowledge and attitudes exist about the current school food system? How do knowledge and programs interact to facilitate or inhibit development of a more healthy and sustainable school food system? Next, three research-based chapters contribute to new understanding. Chapter Five is a case study about a school greenhouse. The case study took place earlier in my PhD program and helped lead to the adoption of the systems methodology applied throughout this dissertation. Chapter Six is based on a survey of 68 principals. The results of the survey highlight the persistence of variability as a key defining feature of school food in the province and the need for more responsive and collaborative tools to assess and enhance school food systems across the province. Chapter Seven discusses findings from 34 key informant interviews of stakeholders throughout the system of school food in NL. An analysis of these interviews shows how school food system innovators drive systems change by responding to system weaknesses as a source for strategic collaboration and learning. Taken together, the findings provide a deeper understanding of how persistent and substantial barriers make interventions ineffective. Future areas for learning and collaboration are identified. I suggest that collaborative and critical knowledge about the NL school food system is essential for future transformation.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.655

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0090.020
Scholarly communication0.0170.006
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.246
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.112 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMemorial University Research Repository (Memorial University)Same topicComplex Systems and Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207