MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6981702822

EXPLORING THE AFFORDANCES OF OUTDOOR LEARNING: HOW TEACHERS UTILIZED THEM TO ENHANCE THE LEARNING EXPERIENCE

2023· dissertation· en· W6981702822 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity Library (University of Saskatchewan) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicDiatoms and Algae Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffordanceOutdoor educationCurriculumCreativityExpansiveLearning environmentEnvironmental education
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Outdoor learning refers to all forms of learning that take place outside the classroom. This can include specific outdoor education curriculum or other subject areas taught through outdoor experiences. There are many different theories and approaches to outdoor learning, including experiential, environmental, adventure, place or community based, and land-based learning. These approaches may have some differences in goals and methods, but they share similar theoretical foundations and practices. The concept of affordances, which describes the possibilities and opportunities for behavior that objects in the environment offer, is an important theoretical foundation for outdoor learning. The study examined the lived experiences of outdoor learning teachers in relation to how they made use of the affordances available in the outdoor environment using phenomenological methods. Semi-structured interviews were conducted one-on-one with fourteen teachers from Saskatchewan who use the outdoor environment in their teaching practice. Mind-mapping, the hermeneutic circle, and interpretative phenomenological analysis were used to analyse the data. Six themes were identified including: relationships, engagement, flexibility, risk and autonomy, freedom, and health. Out of these themes, six affordances were highlighted including: expansive spaces, distractions, freedom, real, or found, objects, dynamic changeability, and challenge and risk. Teachers utilized these affordances through walks, supporting freedom of expression, camping trips, embracing a student-centered approach, allowing and supporting student interaction with objects, and engaging in challenging or risky activities with proper risk assessment and management. This utilization of the affordances yielded numerous positive benefits including: the development and strengthening of relationships, increased student engagement, student creativity and autonomy, supporting individual learning needs and life skills, and improved student health.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.203 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity Library (University of Saskatchewan)Same topicDiatoms and Algae ResearchFrench-language works237,207