MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7044189804

What is new in new media art education?
\nA critical discourse analysis of the mythologies of media art education at the university

2017· dissertation· en· W7044189804 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University) · 2017
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt Education and Development
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Discourse analysisHigher educationRhetoricCritical discourse analysisSubject (documents)Rhetorical questionDiscipline
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dissertation investigates the training and education of new media artists in higher education. Based on textually described orientations, rationales, and best practices I analyzed discourses that bear on the development of curricular and pedagogical approaches to educate practitioners and professionals in new media arts. Using a critical discourse analysis methodology, I investigated the most predominant concepts, statements, and discursive formations in academic texts published on this topic from the 1980s’ until today. I bring forward the ideologies, the theories, the discursive legacies and discursive patterns that characterize new media art education, and shape the culture of those involved in teaching future media artists. One of the central points of this analysis is the emphatic and cyclic rhetoric of the adjective of ‘new,’ which is embedded in discourses that curiously express ‘old’ inherited disciplinary pedagogies and assumptions. I also examine the perceived and expressed roles of new media artists, and the varied proposals of how these roles can best be cultivated through curricular programs. The analysis of the discourses of the so-called new pedagogies for media art education revealed what is, as well as what is not, new in the education of media artists at the university. The predominant discourses of new media art practices are characterized by calls for changes in the pedagogies in place. Yet this rhetoric is consistently confronted with the inert architecture of the institutions of higher education. I situate the discursive communities and their teaching-learning interactions in the systemic context of the modern western university that promotes a neoliberal orientation—especially in regards to the education of artists. 
\nThis study provides an informed critical understanding of the discourses that have, to date, crystallized in this relatively young field, and to a demonstration of the (un-)likelihood of newness in media art education, in spite of fast-evolving technology, and of the expanding scope of practices of the communities within this field.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.316
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University)Same topicArt Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207