Canción, poesía y danza: un análisis de las elecciones realizadas por alumnos de magisterio (2011 - 2017) en las Universidades de Mallorca
Bibliographic record
Abstract
En la asignatura “Representación Escénica” del Grado de Educación Infantil en la Universidad de las Islas Baleares y el Centro de Estudios Superiores Alberta Giménez de Mallorca, los alumnos eligen libremente una canción, un poema y una danza que presentan ante sus compañeros demostrando competencia artística. \nLos 629 registros obtenidos de estas actividades permiten analizar: los gustos y preferencias de los alumnos (géneros, artistas, lengua y contenido), la influencia de los mass media, el uso de nuevas tecnologías, y la importancia de la educación informal en la adquisición de los conocimientos necesarios para llevarlas a cabo. Las justificaciones de los alumnos incluyen, desde vínculos afectivos (familiares, pareja, amigos), historia personal, moda, estudios previos (formales y no formales) hasta la identificación con valores regionales de lengua y cultura. \nABSTRACT \nIn the subject "Performing Arts in childhood education” that is taught in the Education Degree of Balearic Island University and in Alberta Giménez University Center, students should freely choose a song, a poem and a type of dance. They must perform by heart and demonstrate artistic competence. They provide written data and justification of their choices. Through study of 629 records, we analyse students' tastes and preferences regarding styles and performers (titles, genres, language, text content), influence of mass media culture, the use of new technologies, and the importance of informal education in acquiring the knowledge necessary to carry them out. It is evidenced the little influence of formal education on the choices and skills presented. The justifications include, from affective ties (family, couple, friends), personal history, fashion, previous studies (formal and non-formal) to identification with regional values of language and culture.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".