We Play Art: A Radical Art-Teaching Resource
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
Abstract The four authors created this teaching resource to promote art making as a means of engaging with others and harnessing the agency of materials and objects as collaborative partners. As a radical art teaching resource, the authors view “playing art” as provocations that remove boundaries traditionally existing in art curricula, such as focusing on developmental stages and predetermined outcomes contrived by authoritative adults. Instead, this resource highlights children's play trajectories as art making, such as inventing characters and games from their own aesthetic viewpoints. This teaching resource promotes thoughtfully designed spaces that encourage people of all skill levels to explore their imaginations while embracing unpredictable results. These spaces challenge the typical educational environment by introducing uncertainty as part of play and artistic creation. Inspiration is drawn from the children in the authors’ lives, honoring their imaginative and playful approaches to art and recognizing them as full collaborators in shaping the learning experiences.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.007 |
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