Dancing With children or dancing for children? Measuring the effects of a dance intervention in children’s confidence and agency
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
Dance has benefits in children’s development, including increased self-confidence, physical and mental growth. While much research explores preschool children’s experiences in dance courses, most studies involve pre-designed choreographies led by adults. Some argue that young children have limited ability to create their own choreography. This research challenges that by giving children the opportunity to co-create choreographies, with practitioners, using music of their choice. A new dance framework, Dancing with Dr E, was implemented over 5 months in five preschool classrooms in London. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with practitioners. The findings revealed numerous instances where children’s participation increased, showing excitement and multimodal communication. There was a noticeable increase in children’s confidence, by becoming more vocal about their needs and ideas. Due to the limited number of participants and the absence of a control group, further research on the effects of dance education in children’s confidence and agency is recommended.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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