Ways of Attending: Art and Poetry / Modes de participation : art et poésie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: We have been making art and writing poetry together for many years. As colleagues in arts-based education research, we have journeyed together with many colleagues and students, in many research projects, in dreaming possibilities for teacher education, in promoting the value of a/r/tography as a way of understanding our intricate and composite identities as artists, researchers, and teachers. For us, seeing is not solitary. Instead, seeing is a creative practice of living well with one another in relationship to the world. So, in this article, Rita L. Irwin’s photography and Carl Leggo’s poetry come alongside in order to perform ways of attending.Keywords: A/r/tography; art; Photography; Poetry; Attending; Ekphrasis. Résumé : Nous conjuguons art et poésie depuis longtemps déjà. À titre de collègues de recherche pédagogique à caractère artistique, nous avons évolué auprès de nombreux homologues et étudiants dans le cadre de projets de recherche, en quête d’avenues de formation des éducateurs et dans le but de promouvoir le potentiel de l’a/r/tographie pour mieux comprendre nos identités composites et complexes en tant qu’artistes, chercheurs et enseignants. L’observation n’est pas pour nous un acte solitaire mais bien la pratique créatrice de la cohabitation fructueuse face à notre environnement. Cet article conjugue donc la photographie de Rita L. Irwin et la poésie de Carl Leggo pour proposer des modes de participation.Mots-clés : a/r/tographie, art, photographie, poésie, participation, ekphrasis.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".