Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT This article contends that drama is becoming increasingly precarious in higher education. Reports of cuts and faculty redundancies in the United Kingdon set the stage for a reflection on the author’s own experiences in the UK and Canada as an instructor who began teaching drama but shifted more recently to teaching creative arts courses in a media and communications studies faculty. The article identifies four key factors contributing to the precarity of drama: (1) hierarchization, demotion, and marginalization of drama in the arts and humanities; (2) a centralization of the creative industries that is reshaping the landscape of drama and in the process altering understandings of the meaning and value of studying drama; (3) an intensification of technological mediation in education that is seriously affecting student literacy and engagement levels; and (4) a diminishing regard for literature that is critical of capitalism as universities turn increasingly to skills-based education and training undergraduates to be rational actors for the workforce. The article draws from these areas to call for a more careful understanding of the issues at work and for a more concerted effort to advocate for the importance of drama education.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.005 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".