Narrativa y significación histórica en la comunicación de los museos nacionales canadienses en Facebook
Bibliographic record
Abstract
El patrimonio juega un papel determinante en la construcción de la ciudadanía y las identidades, de ahí la responsabilidad que las instituciones culturales, como los museos, tienen a la hora de articular sus propuestas y discursos. En este artículo se presentan los resultados obtenidos tras analizar el discurso emitido a través de sus posts de los cinco museos nacionales canadienses más activos en Facebook durante 2020, en cuanto a narrativa histórica y al enfoque elegido a la hora de tratar la significación histórica de una pintura, una pieza de la colección, etc. Los resultados muestran una actividad planificada con discursos donde predomina la narrativa histórica tradicional y un enfoque, en cuanto al tipo de significación histórica otorgada a una pieza, centrado principalmente en la relevancia e importancia de los elementos patrimoniales en el imaginario colectivo canadiense.Los datos contribuyen a conocer mejor el desarrollo de pensamiento histórico en el ámbito de la educación no formal en el contexto digital. Teniendo en cuenta la escasez de investigaciones en esta línea, se abre una vía de trabajo novedosa en la didáctica de la historia y del patrimonio. and the approach chosen when dealing with the historical significance of a painting, work of art, etc. The results show a constant and planned activity with discourses dominated by traditional historical narrative, and an approach, in terms of the type of historical significance given to a piece, mainly focused on the relevance and importance of heritage elements in the Canadian collective imagination.The results contribute to a better understanding of the development of historical thinking in the field of non-formal education in the digital context. As there is hardly any research in this area, this research constitutes a new line of investigation in the context of history and heritage education.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".