“Here We Go ’Round the Mulberry Bush”: Problematizing “Progress” in Ontario's Elementary School Dance Curriculum: 1900 to 2000
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Educational scholars agree that the relationship between curriculum development and practice is mitigated by complex political and cultural agendas (Goodson 1984; Vertinsky 2007). As a performing art form and physical activity, dance does not easily fit within the context of a typical school subject and is a site for ontological and epistemological debate. This investigation explores the evolution of elementary school dance curricula in the province of Ontario, Canada from 1900 to 2000. This article addresses three periods of curriculum reform: an emphasis on physical training for the purpose of physical skill, moral discipline, and fitness (1900s–1950s); an emphasis on “movement education” intended to promote individuality, creativity, and physical literacy (1950s–1980s); and a return to dance as exercise for the purpose of cardiovascular health and fitness (1980s–2000). As contemporary scholars, we must promote meaningful dance content in a context of cultural understanding and respect.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".