MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119803894 · doi:10.1002/tesq.235

Representing the Margins: Multimodal Performance as a Tool for Critical Reflection and Pedagogy

2015· article· en· W2119803894 on OpenAlexafffund
Ron Darvin

Bibliographic record

VenueTESOL Quarterly · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiteracy, Media, and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsDramaCritical reflectionReflection (computer programming)SociologyPedagogyCritical pedagogyMultimodalityEpistemologyLinguisticsPsychologyAestheticsComputer scienceVisual artsPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article discusses how drama as a multimodal performance can be a powerful means to represent marginalized identities and to stimulate critical thought among teachers and learners about material conditions of existence and social inequalities.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.036
Scholarly communication0.0180.013
Open science0.0030.019
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTESOL QuarterlySame topicLiteracy, Media, and EducationFrench-language works237,207