Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.006 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".