MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W26868084 · doi:10.1038/srep20601

Preparing Music Educators to Work with Students with Diverse Abilities: An Introduction to Music Therapy

2014· article· en· W26868084 on OpenAlexaff
Elizabeth Mitchell

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiverse Music Education Insights
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMusic therapyMusic educationPsychologyPedagogyMusicalSituatedMedical educationMathematics educationComputer scienceMedicineVisual artsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Music education programs are uniquely situated within Canadian universities as most disciplines do not offer honours education programs at the undergraduate level. Within faculties of music, honours music education students engage in both practical and philosophical preparation for their teaching careers prior to acceptance and enrolment at a Faculty of Education. These students often return to departments of music education to pursue graduate work after having taught music within public or private school systems.\nMusic teachers regularly teach children with special needs within self-contained as well as integrated or inclusive classrooms. Research indicates that music educators are enthusiastic about the prospect of teaching children with diverse needs but feel underprepared as to how to teach them effectively. Music therapists have specific training in using music with individuals who have diverse needs so as to help these specific individuals accomplish goals in both musical and non-musical domains. This introductory workshop, led by a music therapist, will develop graduate students’ understanding of music therapy and introduce them to techniques based on music therapy literature. Relevant also for undergraduate music education students, as well as for pre-service and practicing teachers, this workshop addresses ways to further cultivate practical skills that are useful for any music educator. Although the content is specific to working with children in self-contained special-needs classes, applications to inclusive classrooms will be acknowledged throughout this workshop as well.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.007

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDiverse Music Education InsightsFrench-language works237,207