MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399124301 · doi:10.1386/9781789389135_12

Interpretation Design at a Crossroads With Museum Education

2024· book-chapter· en· W4399124301 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueArtwork scholarship · 2024
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMuseums and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpretation (philosophy)EpistemologyArtVisual artsMathematics educationComputer sciencePsychologyPhilosophyProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Museum interpretation designers share many of the same interests as museum educators when contemplating museum visitors and the quality of their experiences. Yet, the literature in interpretation design rarely mentions the educational aspects of museum design or museum educators as allies and colleagues. Likewise, there is also a paucity of consideration for the educational role of interpretation design in the museum education literature. Using examples of exhibits from two different museums, I build a case that interpretation design is rooted in a multifaceted and multisensorial approach that contributes significantly to the learning potential of visitors’ museum experience. I conclude that outstanding education-oriented interpretation design is the result of a close and mutually respectful collaboration among key museum professionals: the exhibition curator, the interpretation designer and the museum educator.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.194 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it