Poetry unveiled: Multimodality and aesthetic responses as a fresh approach to teaching and reading verse
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In secondary English classrooms, poetry is often a text that is least liked because it is viewed as being “inaccessible,” reserved for the elite, and/or too abstract. Part of the reason for this also lies in the traditional, colonial structures of introducing poetry such as relying on canonical texts and close reading analysis. Yet, outside of the classroom poetry is used in more accessible and engaging manners. With the advancements of technology, there also includes multimodal ways in which to read and write poetry that could be much more interesting for both educators and youth. This paper opens a discussion to consider multimodal and aesthetic responses to including poetry such as using digital apps like PhoneMe, a free accessible platform that allows users to post their written poems, record themselves reciting poems, and pin their poems directly on to an interactive digital map. The uniqueness of PhoneMe—a layered multimodal approach—can provide a more engaging way to teach and learn poetry.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it