Indigenous Museum Curatorship in the United States and Canada: Roles and Responsibilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Indigenous curatorship has become an increasingly visible presence in the public sphere as part of the long process of North American Native people’s efforts to regain control over the representations and uses of their cultures in Western societies. Even though scholars consider this profession fundamental to Native American struggles for sovereignty, many do not have a clear understanding of what it involves. In the context of scarce scholarship on Indigenous curatorship, this qualitative study relies on interview and textual data to articulate Indigenous curators’ understandings of their work of preserving and promoting Indigenous knowledge. It emphasizes the uniqueness of Indigenous curatorship by mapping out this profession’s specific roles and responsibilities within the broader arena of museum curatorship. The study identifies two main directions Indigenous curators take in their work, namely activism and engagement of the public. Activism consists in Indigenous curators’ efforts to critique oppressive knowledge structures, raise awareness of controversial topics of public interest related to Indigeneity, and support Native artists and tribal communities. Engagement of the public refers to Indigenous curators’ strategies of involving source communities in the design of exhibits and diverse audiences in the interpretation of exhibitions.
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) | 0.000 | 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".