MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2233384067 · doi:10.2458/jcrae.4918

Constructing, Performing, and Perceiving Identity(ies) in the Place of Online Art Education

2014· article· en· W2233384067 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

VenueJournal of Cultural Research in Art Education · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt Education and Development
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnonymityDialog boxIdentity (music)Construct (python library)PsychologyOnline and offlineCurriculumOnline identityOnline participationResistance (ecology)Social psychologyPedagogyAestheticsComputer scienceThe InternetArtWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

How young people construct, perform, play with, and perceive their own and others’ identity online influences their participation and engagement in online art education. Art educators have argued that identity performance in the art classroom, both online and offline, is an important aspect to creating critical dialog and resistance to cultural and gender stereotypes. As a result, considering the fluid, dynamic, and contextual qualities of identity(ies) online is a necessary aspect of online art education. To explore this, I present the outcome of imposed anonymity in a research study involving a group of teens and their teachers in an online art social network. Participants were required to perform new identities, which enabled or disabled them from participating in the online art curriculum.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.199
Threshold uncertainty score0.358

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.322 · 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