MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2614871652 · doi:10.18357/jcs.v37i1.15187

Art Making as a Political and Ethical Practice

2012· article· en· W2614871652 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Vanessa Clark

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Childhood Studies · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt Education and Development
Canadian institutionsEmily Carr University of Art and Design
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoethnographyThe artsPoliticsSociologyVisual arts educationPedagogyAestheticsVisual artsPolitical scienceSocial scienceArtLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is an effort to explore arts in early childhood education and care. Drawing on the author’s master’s thesis, autoethnography is engaged to open up discussions of the politics and ethics of arts practice. This paper presents some common ways that art making is approached in the classroom and sug-gests some ways to disrupt these approaches. In conclusion, a useful tool is suggested to support this process of disruption.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0180.129
Scholarly communication0.0240.011
Open science0.0020.011
Research integrity0.0060.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Childhood StudiesSame topicArt Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207