MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2925335825 · doi:10.1080/14681366.2019.1594346

Just entertainment? Student and faculty responses to the pedagogy of media representations of higher education

2019· article· en· W2925335825 on OpenAlex
Elizabeth Marquis, Katelyn Johnstone, Varun Puri

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.

Bibliographic record

VenuePedagogy Culture and Society · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFilm in Education and Therapy
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHollywoodEntertainmentPedagogyPerceptionHigher educationPsychologyGeniusSociologyVisual artsArtPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hollywood film has been positioned as a form of public pedagogy – a site of efficacious informal learning. Acknowledging this educative potential, this article examines the ways in which faculty and students perceive and respond to representations of higher education offered by popular film. Drawing on focus groups and interviews with 22 participants, we discuss the key themes about teaching and learning that faculty and students observed in filmic representations – including an emphasis on genius, the presence or absence of effort, and a prevalence of extreme faculty-student relationships – and consider the extent to which these lessons shape viewers’ understanding and experiences of teaching, learning, and universities. While many participants suggested these representations are 'just entertainment’ and thus have limited impact, their comments nonetheless indicate ways in which films shape their own and others’ experiences and perceptions of the university, underscoring the need for further research in this area.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.330
Threshold uncertainty score0.707

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.528
Teacher spread0.451 · 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