Teaching Classical Chinese Poetry through Reception Studies
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper discusses the contribution reception studies can make to the pedagogy of Chinese poetry. It introduces the major theoretical concepts of reception studies, and then demonstrates how those concepts can be applied in and incorporated into courses on Chinese poetry, using examples of “poetry of fields and garden” and “poems on history” drawn from the author’s own experience teaching courses in Chinese poetry in the U.S. and Canada. Finally, it provides a selected bibliography of works on reception studies, translations of Chinese poetry, and scholarship which uses reception studies to research Chinese poetry and culture. Teaching classical Chinese poetry through reception studies helps students better understand the way the significance of Chinese poetry changes over time. It also aids students to further develop their critical thinking and analytical writing skills as they work to compare the reception of certain poems or poets in different periods.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it