MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391065138 · doi:10.5539/jel.v13n1p180

The Significance of Percussion Instruments in Isan Thai Folk Music within the Context of Music Education and Learning

2024· article· en· W4391065138 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Watchara Homhuan, Peerapong Sensai

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiverse Music Education Insights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPercussionMusic educationContext (archaeology)Folk musicCultural heritageIntangible cultural heritageVisual artsHistoryMusicalSociologyArtArchaeologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In northeastern Thailand, the beating heart of tradition and music intertwines seamlessly. The objective of this study was to explore the significance of percussion instruments in Isan Thai folk music within the context of music education and learning. The scope of the research site spans the northeastern Provinces of Thailand. The study employs qualitative interviews with experts and practitioners, complemented by field visits and observations. The findings emphasize that Isan Thai folk music serves as a cultural bridge, nurturing mutual understanding and expressing the extraordinary occurrences within the community. Music education emerges as a pivotal tool in safeguarding the cultural heritage of Isan Thai folk music, offering students a window into diverse cultures, and enriching their appreciation of the world's cultural tapestry. Despite challenges such as a dearth of successors and waning interest among the younger generation. The preservation of Isan percussion instruments is an invaluable component of intangible cultural heritage, thus contributing substantially to the broader discourse on cultural heritage preservation and the role of music education in fostering cross-cultural appreciation and understanding.

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)0.001
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.240
Threshold uncertainty score0.313

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.231 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education and LearningSame topicDiverse Music Education InsightsFrench-language works237,207