An Example of a Study with Instructed Music Listening Activities with Information and Concert Event Content
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
It is thought that music education in general education, especially for individuals of all ages and levels, is important in the musical development of the individual. Besides, it is seen that the “listening-singing” learning area in general music education teaching programs has an important weight in the program. In this context, it is considered necessary that music listening activities carried out for this learning area should be among the main activities that support other musical activities in classroom music education, which form the basis for the students to benefit from music education. For this reason, it is thought that the active participation of the students in music listening activities will contribute to effective and efficient music education. With this study, it is aimed to determine the contribution of instructed music listening activities to music culture learning outcomes in secondary school music education. For this purpose, an instructed music listening activity was held for students in a secondary school. The effect of the activity performed on the level of success was measured with knowledge tests. According to the results it is found that most of the students achieved an above-moderate success from the recorder family knowledge test.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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