MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389975085 · doi:10.5429/ij.v5i1.745

Editorial Introduction: Popular Music in Education, Special Issue

2015· editorial· en· W4389975085 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lucy Green, Don Lebler, Rupert Till

Bibliographic record

VenueIASPM Journal · 2015
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiverse Music Education Insights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopular musicMusic educationJazzPoliticsMusic historySociologySpace (punctuation)MusicologyVisual artsBest practiceMedia studiesPedagogyAestheticsPolitical scienceArtComputer scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This Popular Music in Education (PME) special issue includes contributions discussing developments in several countries, including Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Germany, Singapore and the United States. It covers a range of approaches, exploring technology, hermeneutics, theory, guitars, jazz, songwriting, DIY/DIWO, politics and music industry perspectives. As music institutions have increasingly opened their doors to popular music, this has inevitably led to a greater level of interest in how you teach and learn popular music. PME is presenting a louder presence within Popular Music Studies (PMS), as the ground prepared by PMS has made space for a wave of new PME courses and students to sweep through educational contexts. In the wake of such expansion, this special issue intends to promote a further understanding of pedagogical best practice. The development of PME is something that is long overdue, and that seems likely to greatly expand and enrich the frame of PMS.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.115

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0070.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.020

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIASPM JournalSame topicDiverse Music Education InsightsFrench-language works237,207