Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dance as an artform touches the biopsychosocial dimensions of people and as such is increasingly used as a vehicle to improve the quality of life of diverse populations in the community. Yet little is known about how dance classes are experienced by marginalized populations. The purpose of this action research was to explore the potential of dance to contribute to the recovery of women having experienced homelessness. The objectives were to describe: 1) the artistic content (the ‘what’) and the pedagogical approach (the ‘how’) of the classes, and 2) the experiences of all the people involved in the action research (women, workers at the women’s home, dance facilitators and researcher). Over a three-year period, weekly classes were offered in a women’s home. Data was collected through individual interviews, focus groups and observations. A thematic analysis revealed eleven categories of dance activities which were subsequently associated with indicators of recovery. The pedagogical approach was driven by a set of values clearly embedded in the classes; the facilitators deployed numerous adaptations to answers the women’s needs. Sufficient evidence supports the claim that dance is a promising practice for individual women’s process of recovery. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".