Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fear and embarrassment prevent frank and meaningful communication on the topic of sex. Participatory theatre can break the uncomfortable silence, and with over 700 performances across Canada, Jane Heather's award-winning play Are We There Yet? has been an effective tool for teaching teen sexuality since 1998. The play and accompanying educational program were the subject of a major impact assessment where researchers from many disciplines examined how and why theatre can make change. This comprehensive, well-organized volume by two leading experts in community-based theatre offers a rich diversity of material and analysis. Theatre, Teens, Sex Ed will be a valuable resource for academics, practitioners, and specialist readerships in the fields of theatre, sex education, sociology, and public health. The play appears in the volume and is available separately as a reproducible PDF. A video production of examples of theatrical participation is included on a pocketed DVD. Contributors: Shaniff Esmail, Brenda Munro, Tracy L. Bear, James McKinnon, and the Are We There Yet? Community-University Research Alliance. Jan Selman is Professor in the Department of Drama at the University of Alberta in Edmonton. She directs contemporary and original theatrical work. Jane Heather is a playwright and Associate Professor in the Department of Drama at the University of Alberta. Both have worked extensively creating theatre for change in collaboration with communities.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.084 | 0.011 |
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".