MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411882567 · doi:10.5539/jel.v14n6p260

Integrating Art and Technology: Enhancing Art Faculty Competencies in China’s New Liberal Arts Era

2025· article· en· W4411882567 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Baoyun Liu, Suwat Julsuwan, Pacharawit Chansirisira

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Media and Visual Art
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisual arts educationLiberal arts educationChinaThe arts21st century skillsHigher educationSociologyPsychologyVisual artsPedagogyMathematics educationPolitical scienceArtLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The New Liberal Arts framework represents a significant reform in Chinese higher education, emphasizing integration of technology, interdisciplinary collaboration, and cultural preservation. As this educational paradigm evolves, art teachers face unprecedented challenges requiring new competencies. This research aimed to: 1) investigate components of competence for university art teachers under the New Liberal Arts background; 2) explore the existent and desired states of these competencies in Ningxia; and 3) create a program to enhance these competencies. The study employed a three-phase methodology: first identifying competence components through document analysis and expert validation (n = 5); then exploring competence states through questionnaires with 205 art teachers selected via multi-stage random sampling; finally developing and evaluating a competence enhancement program. Results identified five key competence components: Knowledge Literacy, Didactic Ability, Digital Literacy, Uphold Fundamental Principles and Break New Ground, and Moral Education Ability. The existent state of competence was at medium level, while the desired state was at highest level. Digital Literacy emerged as the highest priority need. The developed program, utilizing a 70:20:10 learning model, received highest ratings for both suitability and feasibility, confirming its potential effectiveness for enhancing art teacher competence under the New Liberal Arts framework.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education and LearningSame topicDigital Media and Visual ArtFrench-language works237,207