MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2771883810 · doi:10.26443/crae.v44i1.10

Derailing Dewey: Art Education and Social Reconstruction | Déraillement de Dewey : éducation artistique et reconstruction sociale

2017· article· fr· W2771883810 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Sebastien Fitch

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Review of Art Education / Revue canadienne d’éducation artistique · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt Education and Development
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdeologyHumanitiesPostmodernismSociologyPoliticsThe artsArt historyArtPolitical scienceLawVisual artsLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: In this paper, a case is made for a critical re-examination of current trends in art education which support the adoption of inherently politically motivated curricula. The author examines the historical influence of Postmodernism upon both the fields of art and education, and goes on to argue that the potential for art to serve as a vehicle for ideology has caused many art educators to mistakenly conflate their moral role as teachers with their drive to disseminate their personally held political beliefs.Key words: Arts; Education; Ideology; Morality; Dewey; ActivismRésumé : Cet article établit le bien-fondé d’une révision critique des tendances actuelles dans le domaine de l’éducation artistique qui favorisent l’adoption de programmes à caractère intrinsèquement politiques. L’auteur examine l’influence historique du postmodernisme sur les domaines de l’art et de l’éducation. L’auteur allègue que le rôle potentiel de l’art comme vecteur idéologique a incité plusieurs éducateurs artistiques à y associer à tort un rôle moral dans l’espoir de disséminer leurs propres convictions politiques.Mots-clés : arts ; éducation ; idéologie ; moralité ; Dewey ; activisme

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.040
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.265 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Review of Art Education / Revue canadienne d’éducation artistiqueSame topicArt Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207