MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6961053262 · doi:10.14288/1.0412873

The perspectives of early childhood education and care practitioners in British Columbia on their outdoor play pedagogy

2022· article· en· W6961053262 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Green Space and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutdoor educationCognitive reframingAffordanceEarly childhood educationEarly childhoodOutdoor activityVariety (cybernetics)Qualitative research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Compared with previous generations, young children in Canada have fewer opportunities to play outdoors and to experience the benefits of outdoor play such as improved physical and mental health and increased connection to the natural world. Early childhood education and care (ECEC) practitioners can increase young children’s access to outdoor play; however, they encounter challenges providing such opportunities. The purpose of this research project was to explore how ECEC practitioners who used an online outdoor play risk reframing tool (the ECO tool) describe outdoor play, their outdoor play pedagogy and the influences on their outdoor play pedagogy including the ECO tool and the COVID-19 pandemic. Eight ECEC practitioners in BC who used the ECO tool in a separate randomized control trial study of the tool were recruited for the present study. Using Symbolic Interactionism as the theoretical and methodological framework, qualitative data were collected from the participants through semi-structured online participant interviews. The ECEC practitioners described outdoor play as a valuable aspect of their programs, being child-driven, involving various forms of play, spending time in nature, and fun for children. The practitioners characterized their outdoor play pedagogy as being child-directed, and correspondingly that they minimized intervening in children’s outdoor play. Most practitioners portrayed their outdoor play pedagogy as juxtaposed to their indoor play pedagogy, where they adopted a more hands-off and less structured approach outdoors relative to indoors. Their outdoor play pedagogy also involved prioritizing time outdoors with children and providing a variety of affordances outdoors. The practitioners spoke of relationships with children, families, licensing, and colleagues as both constraints and supports on their outdoor play pedagogy. Most of the participants found that the ECO tool supported their outdoor play pedagogy; however, it had a neutral impact for a few participants. Finally, the COVID-19 created an impetus for these practitioners to enhance children’s opportunities for outdoor play, but they also encountered challenges related to the pandemic. Implications of the practitioners’ outdoor play pedagogy are discussed.

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)0.006
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 score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.240

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0190.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Same topicUrban Green Space and Health→French-language works237,207→