Apport des sciences de l’éducation au concept et aux pratiques de médiation culturelle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette réflexion s’appuie sur le constat d’un déplacement du centre de gravité des musées des objets de collection vers les visiteurs. Ce passage est marqué tant par l’augmentation que la diversité des formes de la participation des publics au sein de l’institution. Le concept de médiation suggère une démarche holistique qui accueille sous sa coupole une constellation de pratiques, prenant en considération toutes les fonctions muséales et toutes les dimensions – physiologiques, affectives, ludiques et cognitives – de l’expérience muséale vécue avant, pendant et après la visite dans l’espace réel ou virtuel. Toutefois, le flou définitionnel qui caractérise la médiation culturelle en milieu muséal rend difficile son opérativité pratique. Pour cette raison, elle nécessite un support théorique permettant d’encadrer davantage les stratégies d’intervention auprès des publics. D’où la question : les approches théoriques des sciences de l’éducation, notamment le constructivisme et le socioconstructivisme, facilitent-elles la normalisation des pratiques de médiation en milieu muséal sans pour autant en corrompre la nature ?
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 | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.052 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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".