MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2938582448 · doi:10.18432/r27h09

Teaching for the Ambiguous, Creative, and Practical: Daring to be A/R/Tography

2017· article· en· W2938582448 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Delane Ingalls Vanada

Bibliographic record

VenueArt/Research International A Transdisciplinary Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience, Education and Cognitive Function
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPraxisPsychologyPedagogyThe artsVisual arts educationMathematics educationPerceptionVisual artsEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This purpose of this inquiry is to explore how an a/r/tographic model of shared inquiry led to deeper insights about learner-centered pedagogy. Invited to teach and redesign a very large ‘Art & Society: Visual Arts’ course at a large university with a 21st century issues-based focus, together with my commitment as a constructivist, learner-centered teacher, the current phenomenological study was born. The phenomena studied was whether a large, lecture-style class taught from a more non-traditional, non-lecture, art-as-experience, learner-centered epistemology might affect students’ balanced thinking and perceptions about their learning. Students’ perceptions, along with the regulatory role of emotions, are critical factors in motivation and behavior; students’ self-beliefs about learning and their capabilities affect their behavior, resilience, and persistence in the face of challenge.Arts-based methods of inquiry with multiple forms of data, regarding both students’ and researcher’s lived experiences resulted in new artforms and informed praxis. After a student survey was determined the best way to poll perceptions about their learning in a more constructivist environment, the author’s Mixed Parallaxic Praxis method emerged from this study. Key findings indicated students’ increased openness to other perspectives and to cultural and creative experiences, increased engagement and a personal desire/thirst to create art, and a personal confidence to analyze art—despite their lack of former experience with artmaking or art instruction in high school. Qualitative and survey data informed how learner-centered practices enhance students’ self-beliefs about their abilities as creative learners, so important to overall motivation and capacity to learn overall.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.524
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0070.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.244
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArt/Research International A Transdisciplinary JournalSame topicNeuroscience, Education and Cognitive FunctionFrench-language works237,207