« Les grands-parents prennent la parole ! » : l’inclusion dans le cas du programme Abuelas y abuelos cuentacuentos de la Casa de la Literatura peruana à Lima
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For several decades, the museum has been reinventing itself in a democratic dynamic, as a forum and, more recently, as a laboratory, while waiting for the different types of publics, such as elderly people, a growing population, asking for aging assets inside institutions and the profit of their fundamental rights. These concerns have been addressed in a diverse and sustained approach based on international museological reflection. However, in Peru, political and academic attention to inclusion and accessibility in cultural fields, and more specifically in museums, is very recent. This is why this article focuses on the current state of participation of a population that has great potential, but which has not been examined in depth. This study, moreover, provides a mixed methodology (qualitative and quantitative) and multidimensional, with various techniques and research instruments such as the semi-fixed interview, the digital survey and the imaginary analysis form, with the participation of the program managers, its participants and specialists (one of them, an art historian and head of mediation and audiences in an art museum [MAC-Lima] and, the other, a university professor specializing in audience studies). Thus, the article is divided into two parts. First, we provide a historical, theoretical and contextual framework to show a general portrait of the participation of elderly people in Peruvian museums. Then we present the specific case of the «Storytelling grandparents» program at the House of Peruvian Literature (below CASLIT), between 2018 and 2022.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; 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".