Arts and Culture to Foster Self-determination in Young Adolescent Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Being in contact with and being offered the opportunity to create art in its various forms has been shown to contribute to young adolescents’ development and flourishing. Indeed, it allows them to develop their innovation and critical thinking skills, while also favouring introspection, awareness, and regulation of their emotions, and building social skills. Through works of art, students are also in contact with pieces that echo their own existential questions and that widen their horizons, which can help further their understanding of the world that surrounds them and themselves. This better understanding, in turn, can fulfil their basic psychological need for self-determination, which has been shown to be beneficial for psychosocial adjustment. Interventions that cultivate self-determination, such as art-based interventions and the use of material culture, also promote citizen engagement and wellbeing in young adolescents. This chapter is divided into two sections and presents results from studies conducted in the province of Quebec, Canada pertaining to: (1) the impact of art-based interventions on young adolescents’ (ages 11–12) mental health and wellbeing; and (2) how the use of material culture can help adolescents (ages 13–15) think critically and foster their self-determination.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".