MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2607756294 · doi:10.26443/crae.v43i1.24

Rethinking Docent Training at the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts: A Pilot Project

2016· article· en· W2607756294 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Review of Art Education Research and Issues / Revue canadienne de recherches et enjeux en éducation artistique · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInclusive Education and Diversity
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersConcordia University
KeywordsHumanitiesDialogicThe artsArtSociologyPsychologyVisual artsPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: In 2014-2015, the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts (MMFA) and Concordia University's School of Extended Learning conducted a joint pilot project with the objective of determining the effectiveness of a new approach for training volunteer museum guides based on a dialogic method. In this paper, we address: (i) the conceptualization of alternative training based on dialogic concepts; (ii) the development of a new course outline; (iii) the trial period during which volunteers took part in test training; (iv) and, finally, aspects of what we learned during this undertaking. This pilot project is important because it will influence future docent training at the MMFA and possibly elsewhere.KEYWORDS: Museum education; docent training; dialogic teaching; video elicitation; participant-centered exchangesRésumé: Le Musée des beaux-arts de Montréal (MBAM) et l’École d’apprentissage prolongé de l’Université Concordia ont mené en 2014-2015 un projet pilote concerté afin de déterminer l’efficacité d’une nouvelle approche de formation des guides bénévoles au musée, approche fondée sur une méthode dialogique. L’article couvre les points suivants : (i) la conceptualisation d’une nouvelle formation fondée sur les concepts dialogiques ; (ii) la mise au point d’un nouveau schéma de cours ; (iii) la période d’essai pendant laquelle les bénévoles ont suivi la nouvelle formation à l’étude ; et finalement (iv) les différents aspects de ce que nous avons appris au cours de cette démarche. Ce projet pilote est important car il influencera la formation future des guides-interprètes du MBAM et peut-être même ailleurs.MOTS CLES: Éducation muséale; formation guide bénévole; enseignment dialogique; incitation par video; les échanges participant

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 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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.697
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.311
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.157 · 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