Repenser la formation professionnelle en muséologie : le cas du Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vingt-cinq ans après la création du premier programme de formation en muséologie au Québec (1988), l’Université du Québec à Montréal et l’Université de Montréal s’engagent dans une réflexion sur la refonte de leur programme conjoint de maîtrise. Après deux décennies de mutations profondes dans l’univers des musées (Hedegaard, 2004 ; Simon, 2010 ; Altshuler et al., 2011 ; Regourd, 2013 ; Bergeron et al., 2015), comment repenser la formation des jeunes professionnels afin qu’ils puissent composer avec ces transformations qui concernent à la fois de nouveaux objets de collections et de nouvelles technologies qui transforment la nature même des collections et qui conséquemment posent des défis de conservation et de médiation. L’analyse propose une approche conceptuelle des transformations de l’univers des musées, un bilan de la formation et ses effets sur la pratique professionnelle au Québec et au Canada.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.028 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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 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".