Girls Rock! Best Practices and Challenges in Collaborative Production at Rock Camp for Girls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rock Camp for Girls Montreal (RCFG) is a summer camp where girls aged 10-17 learn an instrument, form, band, and write and perform an original song. Based in a feminist mandate of empowerment, this camp seeks to foster greater inclusion of girls and young women in musical production. Mobilizing the concept of the community of practice (CoP), this chapter forwards a case study of RCFG through participation observation, examining this organization’s pedagogies and practices, and evaluating how conceptualizations of the CoP (Lave and Wenger 1991; Wenger 1998, 2010) afford a lens to understand how RCFG seeks to widen access to male-dominated music scenes through collaboration. Highlighting challenges and successes at RCFG in fostering greater participation in cultural production, this chapter contrasts RCFG’s mode of collaborative production with individual-focused and male-dominated norms in the music industry. Making use of Wenger’s (1998) CoP characteristics of mutual engagement, joint enterprise, and shared repertoire, this chapter defines RCFG as an alternative CoP in that its characteristics differ from normative practices in CoPs that may result in exclusion. While the RCFG model offers some potential in combatting barriers in entry to cultural production, this chapter concludes that collaborative modes of production alone cannot intervene in systemic barriers to entry to creative work or lack of equity in the creative industries writ large. REFERENCES<br>Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). <i>Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation</i>, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br>Wenger, E. (1998). <i>Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity</i>, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".