Model New Media/Video Programs in Arts Education: Case Study Research
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
As a result of cheaper, accessible, and user-friendly technologies, there is an increasing volume of videos created by children, yet these works often lack excellence. Strong pedagogical practice is important to nurture excellence in video production, but there is scant literature in this area. In this paper, I examine best practices through a case study of three outstanding, diverse Canadian new media/video art programs at the middle and secondary levels in which students consistently gained recognition. I specifically looked at background information on each school, the structure and pedagogical approaches of the programs, and the strengths of each program. Although I found that the three programs had different focuses, curricula, and teaching styles, the programs shared a project/content driven, student-centered curricula, combined with collaboration, and community outreach. The most significant of my findings was a focus on artistic and creative practices as opposed to technological ones to foster outstanding school video programs.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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