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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Disability Arts (arts created by people with disabilities as a political act), which grew out of the Disability Rights movement in the United States and in England in the 1970s–1980s, is not widely practised or recognized in Northern Ireland. Most arts practice in the region involving people with disabilities is based on an Arts and Disability approach (arts for people with disabilities by non-disabled people). This approach tends to attract criticism from the Disability Arts movement, as it relies on non-disabled facilitators and practitioners, who may not challenge the ownership and power dynamics of the dominant over the marginal group. This suggests that there is need for cultural and attitudinal change. However, history has repeatedly shown that it is neither appropriate nor acceptable to ‘cut and paste’ the British model into the Northern Irish context. Furthermore, the social model of disability embedded in UK legislation has recently been challenged by certain voices from within disability studies. The latter half of this article focuses on the initial stages of a participatory action research study with the theatre company Kids in Control, Belfast, in August 2011. The first in a series of three workshop cycles, this practice research had a focus on developing working relationships with young adults with learning disabilities, and observing the way in which they work individually and as a group using drama. Subsequent research will be used to investigate the development of an independent professional theatre company to be led by the young people themselves, given that this is their preferred outcome. Throughout the research process, some of the following questions will be investigated: Given that contextually appropriate transformative cultural and attitudinal change needs to take place in Northern Ireland with regard to disability, how exactly should this happen? What should these changes look like, and what should be the result? How can models of good practice be developed and disseminated?
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it