Exploring the Transformative Power of Literature: Aesthetic Experiences in Business Education
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
This study explores the significance of aesthetic experience in management education by analyzing an educational approach that integrates literary art to foster transformative learning in business students. Drawing inspiration from pedagogical practices in medical schools, the research investigates how literary art can expand reflection and create a ‘humanizing impact’ within management education. The qualitative methodology combines document analysis, field observations, graduate reports, and semi-structured interviews with graduates, program creators, and business school directors. The findings highlight both the limitations and the potential of literary art to catalyze transformative learning, emphasizing the importance of engaging participants’ affective, cognitive, and volitional dimensions. This study builds on a transformative learning model by integrating aesthetic experience into the theoretical framework of Transformative Business Education, offering a perspective that enhances the traditional pragmatic-rational focus of management education. The research aims to expand theoretical discussions and practical methodologies by incorporating aesthetic elements into management education.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| 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