MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2299925177 · doi:10.14288/1.0055162

Art as a representation of children’s learning experiences : a Reggio Emilia inspired study

2010· article· en· W2299925177 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bo Sun Kim

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt Education and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepresentation (politics)SociologyArtificial intelligenceComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to explore how children construct their knowledge using art as a learning and knowledge representation tool in the course of carrying out a project. In particular, this study was conducted in a Reggio inspired Canadian child care classroom in order to examine how the fundamental principles of the Reggio Emilia are implemented within a Canadian context. Qualitative case study methodology was employed to investigate children’s knowledge-building processes and their knowledge representation. The study focused on the in-depth study of six children’s activities during a ’Shades of Pink’ project. For this study, the process of children’s knowledge-building was documented. Through documenting this project, Shades of Pink, children’s own ideas and theories were discovered; children’s discussions were traced; and children’s multiple forms of representations were presented. This case study provides insight into the way the children construct knowledge. The project was first initiated because of children’s interest in mixing paints. In the collaboration with their teacher, the children developed the project into a meaningful context for learning. The children constructed hypotheses, tested their theories, and exchanged thoughts with their peers and the teacher in order to build knowledge. Through this process, the children constructed at least two different kinds of knowledge (a) social understanding/relationships, and (b) content knowledge. The children’s knowledge building processes are evident in the pedagogical documentation that was kept, including children’s conversations, teacher’s comments, pictures of children’s work, and pictures of children working. Pedagogical documentation played an important role in children’s learning in terms of (a) promoting parents’ involvement in children’s learning, (b) enhancing children’s learning, (c) helping the teacher plan and evaluate children and (d) making children’s learning visible.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.291
Threshold uncertainty score0.580

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0130.011
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicArt Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207