Voyageur Philosophers: Exploring Canoe Expedition Pedagogy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Canada, the canoe is an integral part of the history and development of nationhood (Raffan, 1999), a vital part of its leisure and tourism industry (Stebbins, 2005), and a central focus of many summer camps and outdoor education programs (Baker, 2005). While a recreation activity for many, each summer there are expedition canoeists who decide to paddle through the waterways of Canada over a distance and duration that many would consider extreme . As canoeing in Canada is part of the national historiography (Dean, 2006; Raffan & Horwood, 1988), this study examines the personal and cultural components of canoeists who have embarked on cross-Canada or extended canoe expeditions of 30 days or more. The intent of this phenomenological study is to explore the motivations and meanings that expedition canoeists make of their travels. Through semi-structured interviews with “modern-day voyageurs”, this study explores how attitudes towards canoeing and wilderness travel are intertwined with national and historical perceptions, the human/nature relationship, spirituality, and the dual search for community and individual identity. The testimony of the participants suggests that there is increased advocacy and education from the paddlers upon their return and that the duration of their trip suggests an extension of flow theory into the expedition culture. In part, the applications of these findings lead to the creation of an example secondary school history curriculum that allows students to paddle with purpose.
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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".