Teaching Community Archiving
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Community archiving is grounded in grassroots documentation projects. This article, collectively written by an instructor and students of a community archiving course in a professional ischool, describes a process of teaching community archiving in ways that draw on and embrace community archiving principles and ethos rather than operating in opposition to them. It argues that teaching community archiving can create a classroom community that becomes a community archive in itself, and this article acts as one artifact created in the overall process. The article also offers information on the course outline, outcomes, pedagogical approach, and projects – some of which are documented in the text – that may be useful to other archival educators. It emphasizes the value of the personal, affective, and collaborative aspects of archival practice that are emphasized in community archiving practice and literature, and it also draws attention to the ways in which these operate as dimensions of pedagogy and classroom community, allowing both the content and delivery of the class to work in harmony. RÉSUMÉ: L’archivistique communautaire est ancrée dans des projets de documentation provenant d’initiatives populaires. Cet article, rédigé collectivement par un enseignant et des élèves dans le cadre d’un cours portant sur les archives communautaires, décrit un procédé d’enseignement qui embrasse la philosophie et les principes de l’archivistique communautaire plutôt qu’en opposition à ceux-ci. Il soutient que l’enseignement de l’archivistique communautaire peut créer une sorte de communauté d’apprentissage, qui devient en soi un espace archivistique communautaire. À ce titre, cet article fait partie d’un processus plus exhaustif. Il offre également de l’information sur le plan de cours, les objectifs du cours, l’approche pédagogique ainsi que les projets, dont quelques-uns sont mis de l’avant dans le texte. Cette information peut être utile à d’autres enseignant.e.s en archivistique. L’article souligne la valeur des aspects personnels, affectifs et collaboratifs des pratiques archivistiques, qui sont mis en évidence dans la littérature et les pratiques archivistiques communautaires. Il attire également l’attention sur les manières dont ces aspects fonctionnent en tant que dimensions de la pédagogie et de la communauté d'apprentissage, permettant d’harmoniser le travail sur le contenu et l’environnement formant la salle de classe.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".