MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2610911718 · doi:10.5539/jel.v6n3p273

Pre-service Music Teachers’ Metaphorical Perceptions of the Concept of a Music Teaching Program

2017· article· en· W2610911718 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEducation Practices and Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMusic educationPsychologyMathematics educationPerceptionThe artsSample (material)Variety (cybernetics)Teaching methodPedagogyComputer scienceVisual artsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study was intended to reveal pre-service music teachers’ perceptions of the concept of a “music teaching program” with the use of metaphors. Its sample included 130 pre-service music teachers in the Music Teaching Program of Fine Arts Teaching Department in Balıkesir University’s Education Faculty. The study data were collected by having the participants complete the sentences: “The music teaching program is like... because...” and “The music teaching program is similar to... because....”. The study’s qualitative data were collected using a survey form with open-ended questions. Subsequently, the data were interpreted using content analysis. The pre-service music teachers produced 30 metaphors. These metaphors were classified into six conceptual groups based on their shared aspects. The study concluded that pre-service music teachers explained the concept of a “music teaching program” using a variety of metaphors.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.280
Threshold uncertainty score0.886

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.277 · 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