Circus Education In Québec: Balancing Academic And Kinaesthetic Learning Objectives Through an Artistic Lens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With this research, I investigate the coexistence of academic and kinaesthetic curricular goals in post-secondary circus education in Quebec, Canada, specifically exploring how students, circus instructors, academic teachers and administrators value curricular elements within the context of their perceptions of their institution’s program objectives. The interdisciplinarity of circus studies invites analysis through methodologies and theories borrowed from other disciplines. From Sport Psychology I draw on models for assessing the kinaesthetic technical knowledge related to preparing an athletic body for elite performance (Bloom & Sosniak, 1985). The field of Curriculum Studies offers a lens through which to understand both the curricular models of each school and to assess the academic motivation of the students. The theoretical frameworks of hidden, null, implicit and explicit curricula provide a strong platform for investigating how circus schools communicate institutional values of subjects, student behaviour and career preparation (Apple & King, 1983; Eisner, 2002). In both post-secondary Quebec professionalizing circus programs, discussion groups of students, circus instructors, academic teachers and administrators were asked to define their institution’s program objectives and reflect upon the curricular content in light of those objectives. After reflection and analysis, it is apparent that the Quebec post-secondary circus education community has a common understanding of the learning objectives surrounding physical, artistic and vocational content, but disparate understandings of how academic content relates to the program objectives.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".