Harnessing the power of Flight
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our actual abstract should be as follows: Book Title – Routledge Companion to Drama in Education (ed. Mary McAvoy and Peter O’Connor) Chapter Authors – Robyn Ayles, Heather Fitzsimmons Frey, Margaret Mykietyshyn Chapter Number & Title – Chapter 27, Harnessing the Power of Flight: Devising Responsive Theatre for the Very Young How could a rights-based curriculum, featuring play-based goals and relationship-focused learning through co-inquiry, shape a theatre creation process? The Urban Wildlife Project is a devised theatre initiative for early years audiences (children aged 2 – 4), based at MacEwan University in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. Reflecting on audience engagement, the creative research team aimed to answer that question by applying the holistic, play-based goals articulated in Flight: Alberta’s Early Learning and Care Framework to interpret children’s experiences. The team used the framework’s reflective Cycle of Co-Inquiry (especially processes of Talking the Documentation and Curriculum Cross-checking) to structure devising and dramaturgy. The framework provides a child-centred methodology for working through a devising cycle (such as the RSVP cycle’s Valuaction stage). The chapter demonstrates how Flight provides language to discuss and extend children’s meaning-making, puts focus on creating meaningful relationships through theatrical experiences, and emphasizes the significance of play and playful, co-created experiences, with the early years demographic.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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; 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".