A Participatory Archives Approach to Fostering Connectivity, Increasing Empathy, and Building Resilience during the COVID-19 Pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper explores two pandemic-era projects conducted by the Museum and Archives of North Vancouver (MONOVA) using a participatory archives framework during the COVID-19 pandemic. #NorthVanStories, a rapid-respond social media collecting project, ran from May to September 2020 and received over 200 submissions. #NorthVanStories–Living Histories, a digital video oral history project, ran from summer 2020 to fall 2021 and produced five videos with seven storytellers from diverse and vulnerable communities. This paper discusses the power of collaborative documenting, storytelling, and memory-making to foster connectivity, increase empathy, and build resilience. It highlights the benefits of working collaboratively with organizations and communities; successful approaches to planning and outreach activities; the importance of flexibility and sustainability when working with communities in times of crisis; and how to ensure the future relevance of archives by being responsive to contemporary events and community interests.
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 | 0.039 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.029 | 0.031 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.029 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".