Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most would agree that travel abroad is a worthwhile and educative endeavour. Assuming this to be true it is the object of the research described in this paper to investigate the process, practice and results of educator-directed travel experiences for high-school students. The vast majority of the relevant literature available deals understandably with tertiary (post-secondary) education, detailing surveys of students’ experiences either in company with other young people or alone, while the ages of the participants range from late teens through to late twenties. The overwhelming conclusions, while informative and revealing, are by their nature relevant only to tertiary and not secondary education. The latter has not been sufficiently investigated. One result of the project will be the creation and development of a program with a curricular focus on Comparative Civilizations and English Studies which ideally will be an in-depth cultural study, culminating with a trip “on location” in Europe. Areas covered will necessarily include the ecological impact of travel abroad and the concerns of local populations about sustainability and sensible consumerism. The research will include personal anecdotal experiences and those of others. This empirical approach, while not scientific and strictly quantitative, should nevertheless support the findings derived from the published investigations of those who have examined the secondary experience. The value of qualitative research will be acknowledged by use being made of information garnered from students’ (informal) interviews. Studies which are anecdotal may not by their nature be statistically sophisticated, but as with the information available in the studies of the tertiary experience mentioned above will contribute to an enriched illustration of the secondary experience. Travel lends itself to anecdote and stories of personal experience, not to say cautionary tales for the enlightenment of the unwary uninitiated. This inquiry into the educational impact of secondary school sponsored student travel abroad will contribute to the academic literature while the program will be a model for other educators to realise and adapt to their own needs and circumstances.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.005 |
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".