Education for sustainable development in post-colonial Trinidad and Tobago
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) is not common parlance in Trinidad and Tobago Primary Schools. Simply put, ESD is an approach to education that transforms our relationship with our environment; our economy and our society through developing knowledge, skills, values, and attitudes that encourages sustainability practices in schools, our communities, the country, and in our own consciousness. Part of UNESCO’s “reorientation of education” was meant to develop ESD values, knowledge, and competencies to reflect sustainability in schools. However, Trinidad and Tobago primary school teachers are encouraged by officials of the Ministry of Education to incorporate sustainability within classroom practices without ESD curriculum or training and, therefore, there is a risk of ESD being reduced simply to concepts, and thus, being implemented poorly, inconsistently, or not at all. The purpose of this phenomenological study was to inquire into Trinidad and Tobago primary school teachers’ perspectives of ESD, how they understood ESD, engaged students in ESD, and the challenges they faced as they attempt to do so. In this study, interviews were conducted with six Trinidad and Tobago’s primary school teachers and one reforestation educator to elicit their perspectives on curricula and sustainability in a post-colonial era. The results highlighted three main ideas: that the postcolonial residue impedes national sustainable development; the importance of healthy community relationships and partnerships in becoming a sustainable nation; and the potential of ESD to encourage the development of a sustainable, locally relevant, culturally appropriate, and child-centred education in a post-colonial context. This study will contribute to a gap in the literature regarding Trinbagonian teachers’ perspectives on ESD in the hopes of informing decision making in Trinidad and Tobago, as well as in the greater Caribbean.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".