Memory and Creativity: Finding a Place Where a Heart May Swirl
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article draws from the fieldwork of my MA thesis, “For a Seed to be Born”: Exploring the Links between Emotions and Everyday Creativity in Elementary Teachers´ Classrooms in Peru (Cuculiza, 2017). Informed by collage inquiry (Butler-Kisber, 2008) and memory work (Strong-Wilson, 2015), the fieldwork comprised an arts-based workshop in which participants were asked to explore and reflect on the lived experiences that contributed towards the development of their creativity (Averill, 1999; Runco 2010; Richards 2010). In focusing on the data collected from one of the participants, namely Heart Swirl (pseudonym), I attempt to answer the following questions: In what ways do memory and creativity interconnect? What sorts of spaces are conducive to the investigation of memories in the educational field? In what ways can artistic expression assist memory and creativity? In support of a reflective practice, this article highlights the importance of recognizing how spaces—and the emotions we attach to our memories of these spaces—may be “latent” in our present (Van Manen, 2016). Engaging in play through collage inquiry in an emotionally safe workshop can assist educators in the development of their own creativity and in their ability to become conscious of the ways in which their past lived experiences influence their pedagogy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".