Bibliographic record
Abstract
STADNICKI "Hand drumming is easy."Or so I have been told.A ccessible is probably what most folks actually mean when they share these thoughts about drumming (seasoned educators, included).There is definitely a sense of immediacy with percussion-a tangible and satisfying relationship between stroke and sound.Proper mechanics and technique can come later, but most anyone can beat a hand drum, join a drum circle, and express their inner beatmaker."Rhythm is universal.""The Drum is the Primal Heartbeat."Or so I have heard.This short reflective paper will provide a glimpse into my experiences with drumming facilitation as both an ad hoc practitioner and drummer/scholar.While it will briefly outline some key pedagogical issues and historical contexts, it will also share practical advice for those who wish to embark on a similar journey (see the appendix in particular).*** My own opinion on drumming facilitation is … complicated.As an ethnomusicologist, I know that many of the above ideas are naive and problematic, likely tied to colonialist views of Western musicality, professionalism, and the hierarchy of tonality over rhythm.As a professional drummer, I find them overly simplistic, even mildly offensive.But in the gig economy, such concerns can be overlooked, as I did while freelancing as a "community drumming facilitator" -a somewhat vague title for "informal music educator" or "group music leader."I have avoided the added label of drum circle facilitator like the plague, due to my own experiences with (and prejudices about) them: the chaos of noise and excessively loud volumes, new age-y white folks in dashikis and Stadnicki, Daniel Akira.2023.On Drumming and (Online) Facilitation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.001 |
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".