MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293251629 · doi:10.3389/feduc.2022.929421

Signature Pedagogies in Collaborative Creative Learning in Advanced Music Training, Education and Professional Development: A Meta-Synthesis

2022· article· en· W4293251629 on OpenAlexaff
Andrea Creech, Katie Zhukov, Margaret S. Barrett

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Education · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiverse Music Education Insights
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersAustralian Research Council
KeywordsCreativityExperiential learningPedagogyProfessional developmentCreative briefCollaborative learningMusic educationPsychologySociologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent debates concerned with Western music performance training have grappled with the question of what kind of education and training will best equip music students to navigate an increasingly dynamic and complex professional environment. Increasingly, attention has turned to the role of collaborative creativity and how collaborative, creative skills can be nurtured. Therefore, this paper interrogates the signature pedagogies of collaborative creative learning in advanced music training, education and professional development. Two research questions were addressed: 1) how can creative collaboration in advanced music training, education and professional development be understood through the lens of signature pedagogies; and 2) what are the core values that underpin signature pedagogies of collaborative creativity in advanced music training, education and professional development. A meta-synthesis of relevant qualitative research published since 2000 was carried out. Ten studies were retained. At the implicit level of signature pedagogies of collaborative creativity, three third-order constructs included a commitment to learning as participation in a community of collaborative practice, valuing collaboration in a creative artistic identity , and the capacity to embrace ambiguity . A further three third-order constructs – relational, experiential and creative exploration - comprised the deep level of pedagogical principles. At the surface level, signature pedagogical practices were structured as social and situated , while reflection in, on and for action was at the core of collaborative, creative pedagogical practices.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.324
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in EducationSame topicDiverse Music Education InsightsFrench-language works237,207