Bibliographic record
Abstract
Outdoor education is common, although often small and delimited, program within schools, providing an avenue in which to teach important skills to students, and may be particularly important for students who struggle in a traditional academic setting. Past research indicates that outdoor education has a positive impact on students in gaining academic and social skills. However, little research has been examined on what participants believe they gain from involvement in outdoor education. Overall, this study provides exploratory research about personal perceptions of outdoor education, assessing the value of outdoor education as part of a larger socio-cultural learning arena. This study investigates into whether youth feel outdoor education experiences creates a more socially inclusive environment among peers. This study complements extensive quantitative research suggesting a positive impact of outdoor education on the development of individuals. I assessed a cohort of students at a private secondary school in Vancouver, Canada. Students participated in qualitative in-depth interviews before and after participation in a school facilitated outdoor education program. I was particularly interested in whether or not students perceived engagement with their classmates differently after the program. Results indicate that students felt more inclusive towards classmates after participation in the program, and had a greater appreciation for team building and communication skills amongst peers. This study suggests areas for further research in student perceptions of outdoor education, which may help advise school board policies surrounding the use of outdoor education programs, as well as advise schools themselves in restructuring their outdoor education programs to better reflect desired learning outcomes.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".