MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2314315554 · doi:10.1177/0261429415576992

Drawing out understanding

2015· article· en· W2314315554 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jennifer Eiserman, Heather L. Lai, Chelsea Rushton

Bibliographic record

VenueGifted Education International · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt Education and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)The artsPsychologyCurriculumVisual arts educationMathematics educationPedagogyClass (philosophy)Visual artsArtComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dabrowski recognized that the creative process is important in the personality development of the gifted and talented. Given the intrinsically creative nature of learning in an arts- infused context, we hypothesize that interdisciplinary approaches to curriculum address the unique needs of the gifted. First, we will summarize Dabrowski’s theory of positive disintegration, providing a theoretical context to discuss an ongoing research project that engages gifted students in arts-based learning. We then briefly describe the implications of positive disintegration in the middle school context, and how art education can support this process. Finally, we describe how two arts integrated projects addressed the process of positive disintegration. In 2013, University of Calgary students in ART 307, “Applied concepts in art with children ages 6-12,” worked with gifted middle school students on an integrated art–social studies–science project called “When Fisher went to Skyland.” In this project, one class of Grade 6 students explored Iroquois culture and sky science through printmaking. In 2014, four classes of Grade 5 students worked with ART 307 students to enhance their understanding of electricity and magnetism through explorations using theatre games, creative movement and animation. We suggest that engaging gifted middle school students in the arts can be a means to facilitate alternative learning methodologies in all subject areas, and provide necessary support in personality development.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.800
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0060.001

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 head0.170
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.155 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGifted Education InternationalSame topicArt Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207