MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404505063 · doi:10.5430/wje.v14n4p12

Contemporary Lusheng as an Educational Resource in Teaching Chinese Folk Music

2024· article· en· W4404505063 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hui Liu, Narongruch Woramitmaitree

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Education · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAsian Culture and Media Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPedagogyTeaching methodResource (disambiguation)SociologyMathematics educationComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The contemporary Lusheng, a reed instrument from the Miao ethnic group in Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, China, has significantly transformed since the 1970s to expand its musical capabilities and adaptability in modern educational settings. This study explores the role of the contemporary Lusheng as an educational resource in teaching Chinese folk music. Conducted in Nanning City and Rongshui Miao Autonomous County, the research involves ethnographic fieldwork, interviews with three key informants, performers, educators, and instrument makers, and observations of educational practices. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis, focusing on how contemporary Lusheng is integrated into music education and its impact on cultural preservation and student engagement. The findings reveal that the contemporary Lusheng, with its expanded pitch range and improved design, is an effective tool for teaching Chinese folk music's technical and cultural aspects. It enhances student engagement and fosters a deeper appreciation for traditional music. However, challenges remain in integrating the instrument into urban education settings and addressing gaps in teacher training. The study suggests further developing specialized teacher training programs and exploring digital media to promote Lusheng in diverse educational contexts.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.348 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of EducationSame topicAsian Culture and Media StudiesFrench-language works237,207