Specifics of Forming an Individual Approach in the Choreographers’ Training During the Pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article is devoted to studying the educational process of individualization of student-choreographers. The study aims to establish the main elements of successful individual approach implementation in teaching choreography during the pandemic. To achieve the goal, the following tasks were performed, in particular, to highlight the problems and their solutions in teaching choreography during a pandemic and to identify changes in the student's and teachers' attitudes toward the quality of choreographers' training. Research methods are based on general scientific methods of cognition, in particular analysis and synthesis, generalization, and descriptive methods. The main method is an experiment in the form of a survey involving questionnaires. The survey results are displayed in tabular and graphical form. The results processing required qualitative and quantitative approaches. The hypothesis is that forms of practice-oriented and variable individual learning require the use of digital technologies in distance education. It ultimately leads to an increase in the education quality level. The result of the study is the discovery of opportunities to improve the teaching practice of choreographic disciplines during a pandemic.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".