MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387654715 · doi:10.23977/aetp.2023.071305

Development and Innovation of College Aesthetic Education from the Perspective of New Media

2023· article· en· W4387654715 on OpenAlex
Peng Li-li, Xu Hang

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Educational Technology and Psychology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Media and Visual Art
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumOpenness to experiencePerspective (graphical)Diversity (politics)Higher educationNew mediaEngineering ethicsSociologyPedagogyPsychologyPolitical scienceEngineeringComputer scienceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The proliferation and development of new media have brought about significant changes in people's aesthetic perceptions and experiences. Currently, aesthetic education in higher education is characterized by diversity and innovation, interdisciplinary and cultural integration, as well as openness and sharing. However, the current offering of aesthetic education courses in college might not completely align with the demands of students. Diversity seems to be lacking in the teaching approaches employed in art education, and the utilization of new media in art education seems to be underexplored. From the perspective of new media, the augmentation of the art education curriculum system within higher education establishments is a goal to be pursued, with an emphasis on its integration across various disciplines. This endeavor involves enhancing the array of teaching methodologies applied in aesthetic education, fostering the personalized implementation of aesthetic education, and placing a notable focus on the nurturing of educators' qualities, all aimed at adeptly harnessing the potential offered by new media tools. Furthermore, strengthening online resource support and optimizing the assessment mechanism for aesthetic education is essential. The current landscape of aesthetic education in higher education institutions reflects the transformation of aesthetic perspectives and experiences due to the widespread adoption and evolution of new media. Addressing the current gaps and leveraging the opportunities presented by new media, aesthetic education can evolve into a more dynamic, relevant, and impactful discipline.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.184
Threshold uncertainty score0.166

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.343 · 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