An analysis of the feasibility of developing a network of residential outdoor schools within the Canadian Biosphere Reserve Association /
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Residential outdoor schools are multi-day learning camps that provide unique settings in which to deliver environmental education. However, such schools are also very complex to develop and difficult to maintain and operate. Within Canada though, there are many examples of successful outdoor school operations, three of which are considered here: the North Vancouver Outdoor School, the Olympic Park Institute and the Golden Ears Learning Centre. From these case studies lessons can be learned regarding issues such as: land tenureship, program design, staffing options, administrative systems, facility requirements, finance options and abilities to attract students. The discussion of these factors can then be applied to the development of a nation wide network of residential outdoor schools within the framework of Canadian Biosphere Reserves. Currently there are ten Biosphere Reserves in Canada which, when analyzed, prove to be very adequate sites for environmental education from both physical and social stand points. The Canadian Biosphere Reserve Association is the coordinating body which fosters communication and cooperation between individual Reserves. If a network of residential outdoor schools were to be developed within this association framework, it would serve, both to fulfill the Canadian Biosphere Reserve Associations mandate to support environmental education and would help partially alleviate the lack of adequate environmental education facilities in Canada today.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".