Aesthetic Representations of Community
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This teacher/action-research inquiry investigated awareness and understanding about students’ sense of\nplace (community) through arts-based lessons within a classroom ethnography framework. Two\nTeacher Candidates used social constructivist pedagogy to plan and teach the same lessons to two\ngroups of elementary students in two different locales, Kamloops (small city) and Ashcroft (rural).\nSoundscapes, visual imagery maps, role play and reflective writing were the aesthetic media utilized.\nInterpretation of the data collected (video, audio, observation and field notes, class discussion and\ninformal teacher-student and student-student conversation) were developed and created using\nautobiographical, reflective narratives by the teacher-researchers involved.\nFindings included: (1) shared creative experiences utilizing acoustic awareness and the use of aural\nrepresentation as a way of expressing understanding was a new and effective learning tool for students in this study; (2) sounds and images, as concrete representations of reality as well as symbolic abstractions, metaphorically reflected broad socio-cultural associations and norms, which were represented as strikingly similar in the two different communities; (3) unexpectedly, community aspects represented on both the map and soundscape were exclusively focused on place, without people; (4) the\nvarious art forms permitted students multiple ways to understand, express and communicate understanding that addressed a diversity of learning styles as students built skills in, and made connections between, the art forms and notably, these modalities made learning more accessible and enjoyable for some reluctant learners in both classes; and (5) generative, collaborative decisions about representing ideas had to be negotiated, thereby requiring critical thinking skills of students as they\ndemonstrated personal attitudes, values and beliefs, providing opportunities for peer leadership and scaffolding.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".