MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2949722651 · doi:10.30535/mto.25.1.8

Music Theory as Social Justice: Pedagogical Applications of Kendrick Lamar’s<i>To Pimp A Butterfly</i>

2019· article· en· W2949722651 on OpenAlexaff
Robin Attas

Bibliographic record

VenueMusic Theory Online · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiverse Music Education Insights
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociologyRacismCurriculumMusicalRepertoireMusic theoryEconomic JusticePedagogyVisual artsArtGender studiesLiteraturePolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kendrick Lamar’s To Pimp A Butterfly offers core music theory instructors many opportunities: to engage with popular music in a curriculum traditionally focused on art music, to discuss theoretical topics not usually considered in the music theory core (including flow, groove, meter and rhythm), and to diversify the range of composer identities included in classroom repertoire. The album’s focus on African-American experiences of race and racism in the contemporary United States also allows instructors to integrate social justice topics with music-theoretical ones. This article discusses three possible models for such integration. In the “plug-and-play” model, examples from the album are embedded within lesson plans focused on traditional music theory topics. In the “concept” model, the undergraduate core curriculum is reorganized to focus on musical concepts rather than on analytical approaches to a particular repertoire, and musical examples from the album are used to explore analytical strategies for each concept. Finally, in the “social justice” model, the album is used as a springboard for classroom discussions and assignments about race, racism, poverty, and more, while still maintaining focus on analytical methods. For all three types, the author includes sample teaching materials including lesson plans, curricular design strategies, and teaching techniques. With this work, the author encourages instructors of all backgrounds, abilities, and institutional settings to consider ways of incorporating social justice into their own classrooms to change the world for the better.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.822
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0650.005

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.229 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMusic Theory OnlineSame topicDiverse Music Education InsightsFrench-language works237,207