Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine the contextual elements that contribute to a successful experience evidenced by both research and practice cultures as a result of the integration of music and other art forms into the language arts curriculum. In order to define the integrated experience as successful, it was also necessary to determine whether the interdisciplinary art/language learning strategies utilized reinforced both language and music learning, and if the integrated experience met the objectives of both research and practice communities. Three second grade classroom teachers from the midwest of the United States and their students chose to participate in this qualitative collaborative research where both the teachers and the researcher were reflective partners in the co-construction of knowledge pertaining to educational practice. Twelve 45 minutes integrated arts/language lessons were devised for each of the three classrooms over a period of one month (three sessions a week) and were taught by the researcher and a graduate student music educator. Data were collected from video tapes of all classroom interventions, informal and semi-structured interviews with the classroom teachers, students, research assistant, school principal and school music specialist, and from written materials and reflective journals. Results indicated that the children learned in both music and language and were able to make connections between all forms of communication, predictions and choices made in both music and language, and between form in music and form in language. Moreover, pedagogical strategies and styles used in the intervention, in addition with supportive, positive, respectful and flexible attitudes from all participants of both research and practice cultures at all levels of the research process, contributed to the success of this integrated study.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".