Education to Theatricality: The Theatrical Workshop as a Training Model the Expressive and Performing Arts in Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Education to Theatricality as pedagogical and artistic research is experienced by almost twenty years inItaly in laboratories and projects organized in collaboration with universities, schools, theaters, educational centers,cultural centers, educational and social services, associations. Education to Theatricality is a science that includesdifferent of disciplines such as pedagogy, sociology, human sciences, psychology and the performing arts in general.The scientific basis of this discipline allows us to apply it in all possible contexts possible and with any individual,because it keep the man as he is in the center of its pedagogical process. One of the fundamental principles ofEducation to Theatricality is the construction of the actor - person; the main aim is the development of creativity andimagination through a scientific training leads by the actor on himself. The present theoretical writing syntheticallyintroduces the fundamental elements of the theory.Method: This study discusses relationship between theater and education analyzing the main elements of this meeting.First part presents the theories: the birth of the theatrical workshop, development of Education to Theatricality and thedefinition of its theoretical issues: I-AM’s scheme; creative subject, creative act; laboratory and its aestheticphilosophy: Art as a vehicle. Second part presents theater pedagogy through creative movement. The text presentsthe exercises on the languages of human communication the method of work. Third part presents projects andplanning in education laboratory expressive arts.Conclusions: Education to Theatricality as pedagogy uses the expressive arts into the theatre workshop for to lead thesubject to path of growth and training activating the original potential skills of this person.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".