MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2774838384 · doi:10.26443/crae.v44i1.33

Creativity and Standardization: The Ability of Museum-Based Programming to Inform 21st Century Education | Créativité et normalisation : la capacité des programmes muséaux à renseigner l’éducation au 21ème siècle

2017· article· en· W2774838384 on OpenAlex
Jennifer Godfrey Anderson, Heather McLeod

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Review of Art Education / Revue canadienne d’éducation artistique · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMuseums and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStandardizationHumanitiesPolitical scienceSociologyPedagogyLibrary scienceArtComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: This paper reports the findings of an investigation of an educational programme situated in a provincial museum complex. Phase One of the research focused on teachers and showed the program promoted observation and reflection. Phase Two assessed the impact on student achievement. The data gathering method necessary for Phase Two revealed tensions between standardization and the arts community. Working with this tension, researchers defined achievement and measured essential program goals of the curriculum (“21st century competencies”). The discussion is interpretive and it is argued that museum-based experiential programming could be a contributor to the discussion on 21st century education policy.Keywords: Museum-Based Education; Standardization; 21st Century Skills; Educational AssessmentRésumé : Cet article relate les résultats d’une enquête menée sur un programme d’étude au sein d’un complexe muséal provincial. La phase un de la recherche ciblant les enseignants a démontré que le programme encourageait l’observation et la réflexion. La phase deux concernait l’impact du programme sur les réalisations des élèves. La méthode de collecte des données utilisée en phase deux a mis en évidence certaines tensions entre la normalisation et la communauté artistique. Les chercheurs ont utilisé ces tensions pour définir la réalisation et quantifier les objectifs premiers du programme (les « compétences au 21ème siècle »). Dans un contexte de discussion interprétative, on y affirme que la programmation expérientielle à caractère muséale, pourrait alimenter le débat sur la politique pédagogique au 21ème siècle.Mots-clés : éducation muséale ; normalisation ; compétences au 21ème siècle ; évaluation pédagogique

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.254 · 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