MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998973008 · doi:10.1080/1461380032000182849

Feminist theory in music education research: grrl‐illa games as nomadic practice (or how music education fell from grace)

2004· article· en· W1998973008 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMusic Education Research · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiverse Music Education Insights
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMusic educationSociologyFeminismMusicologyFeminist theoryMusicalPedagogySocial scienceAestheticsGender studiesVisual artsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gender is inherent in all aspects of the music education profession: musical instruments, occupations, materials, pedagogies and preferences. Despite this, feminist theory has been accepted slowly, and is consequently poorly understood. Working generally outside of the profession's accepted topics and means of research in a type of grr‐illa game practiced against more established ways of knowing, feminist theorists act as nomads, carrying out research that interrogates the exclusionary practices and discourses in which music education is implicated. This philosophical analysis includes an overview of feminist critique in music education philosophy, and discusses direct and indirect responses to this research and to feminist critique in general. My discussion is framed and grounded in the concepts of feminism(s), difference, nomads and grrl‐illa games, and is interwoven with philosophical and social possibilities of taking seriously feminist critique in music education research.

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.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.377
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.005

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.

Opus teacher head0.245
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.165 · 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