MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Embodied Aesthetics, Evocative Art Criticism: Aesthetically Based Research

2011· article· en· W149295923 on OpenAlexaff
Boyd White

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Art Education · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt Education and Development
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmbodied cognitionCriticismArticulation (sociology)AestheticsMeaning (existential)Art criticismRelation (database)The artsArtSociologyPsychologyVisual artsEpistemologyPhilosophyLiteratureComputer sciencePerformance artArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study introduces one approach to arts-based research, one that emerges from aesthetic encounters and ensuing art criticism. Examples are drawn from one preservice teacher’s attempts to write art criticism, both discursive and evocative, based on her personal responses to a chosen artwork. The articulation of her responses is a form of research into herself as a teacher-to-be, her capacities for meaning making in relation to artworks, and her abilities to share that discovered meaning. The study concludes with a discussion of the difficulties inherent in that task.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.841
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.318
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.099 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations7
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in Art EducationSame topicArt Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207