Engaging Children and Young People in the Co-Production of Memory and Culture through Multimodal Ethnographic Research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the changing perception of children’s role in public discourse and the acknowledgement of their right to both agency and participation, the persistent marginalization of children’s views and experiences in the making of public memory and culture needs to be further addressed across disciplinary boundaries. Drawing on research from childhood and memory studies, this article explores how multimodal ethnographic experimentations can be used to invite children and young people to be research partners and co-creators of public memory and culture about the things that concern them. I discuss the Connectors Study, and the Children’s Photography Archive, as an illustrative case example of engaging children in cultural work through research and draw on the premises within this study to suggest an experimental methodology that invites school students as co-creators of educational memory. I argue for an explicit use of multimodality as a research practice that mediates and facilitates children and young people’s memory-making in the present, while creating a framework that recognizes them as co-creators of culture and public memory-making.
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 | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".