MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117873188 · doi:10.53967/cje-rce.7587

(Book Review) Education and Learning for Sustainable Futures: 50 Years of Learning for Environment and Change

2025· article· en· W7117873188 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Madison Hearn, Lucas Vajko Siddall

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l éducation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSustainability in Higher Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExperiential learningSustainabilityWork (physics)Active learning (machine learning)Environmental education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Education is often talked about as being the opening salvo to combat Earth's triple planetary crisis -climate, nature, and pollution, and really any systemic instability of the 21st century.Yet what kind of education is actually required, and whether any of the previous efforts have meaningfully had an impact, remains somewhat unclear.As Miseliunaite et al. (2022) argue, "education does more than react to a changing world; education transforms the world," underscoring the need to critically examine not just educational intent, but educational design and impact.In Education and Learning for Sustainable Futures: 50 Years of Learning for Environment and Change, Macintyre, Tilbury, and Wals offer a concise historical timeline of the evolution of environmental and sustainability education from the 1972 Stockholm Conference to the present.At the Stockholm +50 conference, their argument was framed around a stark realization: "What has become clear is the importance of education and learning in addressing what we can term a crisis of culture" (Macintyre et al., 2025, p. 6).The book will be of particular interest to scholars, teacher educators, early-career educators, administrators, and policymakers seeking a framework grounded in fifty years of historical integration to support a shift in the current paradigm of sustainability education.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.567
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l éducationSame topicSustainability in Higher EducationFrench-language works237,207