MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Creativity: Delusions, Realities, Opportunities and Challenges

2009· article· en· W2079839304 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

VenueInternational Journal of Art & Design Education · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArtistic and Creative Research
Canadian institutionsArthritis Society
Fundersnot available
KeywordsManifestoCreativityCurriculumLegislationInclusion (mineral)AccountabilityFace (sociological concept)PedagogyPolitical sciencePublic relationsSociologyPsychologySocial scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article considers the background and provisions of the New Secondary Curriculum in England. Attention is drawn to the extent of the policy changes by comparing the ten‐year old demands of the Swift & Steers ‘Manifesto for art in schools’ (1999) with the new legislation and guidance. In particular, while there is strong support for overdue recognition of the importance of creativity in the curriculum it is argued that its inclusion remains problematic because the ‘risky thinking’ involved will be difficult in the many schools that have become risk averse in the face of ever increasing accountability. Nevertheless, there are very significant opportunities for art and design provided a number of key challenges are faced and acted upon.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.941
Threshold uncertainty score0.813

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.232
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.127 · 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