Médiation culturelle au musée : essai de théorisation d’un champ d’intervention professionnelle en pleine émergence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La médiation culturelle s’impose dans les sociétés industrialisées en rapprochant les citoyens de l’art et de la culture. Le musée n’échappe pas à ce mouvement de démocratisation et de démocratie culturelles qui souffle sur les institutions culturelles, tant au Québec qu’ailleurs dans le monde. À ce titre, les services d’éducation des musées québécois intègrent de plus en plus la médiation culturelle à leur registre de pratiques et les universités québécoises offrent dorénavant des programmes de formation allant de pair avec les exigences de professionnalisation du domaine. Mais qu’est-ce que la médiation muséale ? En quoi se distingue-t-elle de la médiation culturelle ? Quels en sont les fondements théoriques et conceptuels ? Répondre à ces questions s’avère crucial puisque le fait de mieux connaître et comprendre les fondements du domaine constitue la première étape vers la professionnalisation du métier de médiateur muséal, une profession en pleine émergence.
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 | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.062 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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; 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".