El dibujo infantil como estrategia metodológica para el desarrollo de la creatividad en los niños de la Unidad Educativa Canadá en el período 2019 - 2020
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research takes to establish children's drawing as a tool to develop creativity in fifth year children in the Basic Education Unit of Education Canada. This research has been carried out when we realized that the classes given by the teachers of this institution were very traditionalist, so the classes became monotonous, boring and the students' distraction at the moment of learning. The development of this work has allowed us to know the abilities of each student, this is reflected in the way they develop when drawing and expressing their creativity. The objective of this research is to promote children's drawing as a methodological strategy for the development of creativity in children in the fifth year of Basic Education. This work is based on different types of research such as: exploratory, descriptive and explanatory research, in the same way this research is focused on the qualitative approach and on the non-experimental design, the methods that were put into practice in this research are; inductive method and descriptive method, the technique used was observation and the instrument that was applied in this research is the observation guide. When the research problem was detected, it was established as a proposal to develop children's drawing by applying the microdrawing technique to strengthen creativity in the teaching-learning process. By putting this proposal into practice we have obtained very good results in the fifth year students, since when applying the micro-drawing technique the students are very motivated and enthusiastic about learning, this technique not only develops creativity, but we could also realize that it promotes the development of the socioaffective part and the imagination of the student.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".