Creative making, large lectures, and social media: Breaking with tradition in art and design education
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this article is to challenge the notion of small studio format delivery expectations in art and design education. Our research reports on an introductory Digital Photography course design that produced equivalent learning outcomes in a large enrollment lecture format. The objective of the project was to introduce (1) a case-based approach to teaching and learning and (2) a multitiered feedback model. The positive learning outcomes produced by this course design call into question the prevailing regimes of teaching creative production within the limits of small studio pedagogy. In addition, the multitiered feedback model we propose can be extended much beyond a classroom setting to include ‘crowdsourcing’ as a feedback model in Massive Open Online Courses, also known as MOOCs. Our approach is also highly suggestive of further investigation into applying Kant’s notion of the sensus communis – the shared subjective but universal sense of the aesthetic – to common issues surrounding creativity, scale and evaluation.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it