The judges’ decision is final: Judgement in music talent reality TV and school music education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores music talent reality television (RTV) and conceptualizes it as a site of music education. It also considers whether music talent RTV might magnify sociocultural traits that are less easily detected in other sites of music education. A considerable body of research has developed around RTV, notably from the fields of sociology, media studies, cultural studies and women’s studies. These scholars frequently draw on Bourdieu’s concepts of habitus and capital to analyse participant and audience engagements with the genre. Judgement is central to these discussions, particularly in the subgenre of music talent RTV, with several authors showing how taste and distinction are influenced by habitus. Reviewing the RTV literature highlights how certain musics and musicking experiences are judged, and how such judgement can devalue the musical experiences of those young people who are least likely to access school music education. This raises questions for further study about music talent RTV’s relationship with school music education, and for the study of music talent RTV as a music education setting in its own right, but it also highlights themes that warrant consideration in school music education sites, where judgements and their impacts on access and participation are often disguised or unquestioned.
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 | 0.010 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".