MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7008420799

“Betwixt-and-Between”. The pedagogical function of the relation between Children and Nature in Children’s literature

2019· article· en· W7008420799 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueView · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicNonprofit Sector and Volunteering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeaning (existential)Relation (database)NarrativeNatural (archaeology)Subject (documents)Function (biology)Reading (process)Rhetorical question
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The world of classic and contemporary children’s literature, picturebooks or anime films, sometimes tell children’s stories that are misunderstood by adults. These narratives tend to return childhood directly to the heart of natural world; these stories claim an ancestral affiliation of the child with Nature. So, why do children, more than adults, feel an almost primordial attraction towards Nature?From Carlo Collodi’s Pinocchio to James Matthew Barrie’s Peter Pan, from The Little Mermaid of H. C. Andersen to Charles Kingsley’s Water Babies, from Hayao Miyazaki’s Princess Mononoke to Ponyo on the cliff by the sea, we find narrated childhoods that feel “at home” (Cantatore, 2015) in Nature, linked to it by a strong and irrevocable sense of belonging. Children, pueri aeterni (Hillmann, 1964), are emblematic figures of passages, threshold crossings, mutations and changes: a “Betwixt‐and‐Between”, constantly subject to metamorphosis. Through their literature, children are indeed the representations of what Calvino call Lightness (Six Memos for the Next Millennium, 1988). They are amphibious creatures suspended between multiple kingdoms, in a constant game of being something or something else, someone or someone else, not in a world intended as given and with each creature in the “right place”, but possible transformation and elusiveness.A Reading Key searches in works for children’s – like children’s books or films – , through the interpretative category of narrated pedagogy, for the meaning of literary and artistic descriptions as historical testimonies of the pedagogical function of the relation between Children and Nature.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.050
Scholarly communication0.0100.012
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.281 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueViewSame topicNonprofit Sector and VolunteeringFrench-language works237,207