MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1563429172 · doi:10.4324/9780203838945-15

The promise of ethnography for exploring creative learning

2010· book-chapter· en· W1563429172 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Geoff Troman, Bob Jeffrey

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Research Online (The Open University) · 2010
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCreativity in Education and Neuroscience
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreativityCurriculumPedagogyEthnographyAction (physics)Action researchPublic relationsPolitical scienceSociologyPsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Teachers, governments and employers around the world all aspire to make young people more creative. These aspirations are motivated by two key concerns: to make experience at school more exciting, relevant, challenging and dynamic; and ensuring that young people are able and fit to leave education and contribute to the creative economy which will underpin growth in the twenty-first century. \n \nTransforming these common aspirations into informed practice is not easy. It can mean making many changes: \n \n \nturning classrooms into more exciting experiences \n \nintroducing more thoughtful challenges into curriculum \n \nmaking teachers into different kinds of instructors \n \nfinding more authentic assessment processes \n \nputting young people's voice at the heart of learning. \nThere are programmes, projects and initiatives which have consistently attempted to offer such change and transformation. The English programme, Creative Partnerships, is the largest of these, but there are significant initiatives in many other parts of the world including France, Norway, Canada and the USA. This book not only draws on this body of expertise but also consolidates it, making it the first methodological text exploring creativity. \n \nCreative teaching and learning is often used as a site for research and action research, and this volume is intended to act as a text book for this range of courses and initiatives. The book will be a key text for research in creative teaching and learning and is specifically directed at ITE, CPD, Masters and doctoral students.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0050.024
Scholarly communication0.0130.022
Open science0.0030.008
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.497
GPT teacher head0.495
Teacher spread0.002 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Research Online (The Open University)Same topicCreativity in Education and NeuroscienceFrench-language works237,207