MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400584016 · doi:10.56105/cjsae.v31i2.5565

Adult Education, Exhibitory Strategies and Museums

2019· article· en· W4400584016 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Darlene E. Clover, Kathy Sanford, Nancy Taber

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal for the Study of Adult Education · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Industries and Urban Development
Canadian institutionsBrock UniversityUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This special edition of the Canadian Journal for the Study of Adult Education takes us into the complex, dynamic world of museums and art galleries and discourses of new museology, feminism, transformative learning, public pedagogy, and decolonisation.Museums and art galleries are important institutions for a number of interconnected reasons.Firstly, they are pervasive.Approximately 2300 of these institutions exist across Canada alone and thousands more worldwide.Secondly, they are visited daily by millions of adults, many of whom trust almost implicitly what these highly authoritative, seemingly objective, and highly intellectual storytellers show and tell them about the world and themselves (e.g.Gordon-Walker, 2018;Janes, 2015).Thirdly, while adults visit museums and art galleries for the purposes of leisure and fun, many come to learn something about history, society, art, nature and culture.Therefore, regardless of genre or theme -ethnographic, aesthetic, scientific, textile, industrial, military, Indigenous, or war, to name but a few -our art and culture institutions play a key educational role.They act as nonformal educators through seminars, guided tours, workshops and various forms of community engagement.Museums and art galleries are also masters of informal teaching and learning.By fusing together objects, artefacts and narratives into exhibitions and displays, these institutions visualize and engulf us into created worlds with extraordinary communicative power.They have, to borrow from Giroux (2004), great power "over how people think of themselves and their relationship to society and to others" (p.59).Yet similar to all practices of power, museums and art galleries are never neutral.The "nature of their work, selecting which objects to collect and whose memories to preserve-or not, deciding whose stories will be told-or not, and not least, defining which voices are worthy of being heard in the great human choir of history speaks of a great deal of power" (Brekke, 2018, p. 268).This power makes museums and art galleries, as this volume illustrates, legitimate spaces of critique and intervention for adult educators.Museums are practised at weaving narrow mainstream accounts of history, culture and people, shaping what people see, understand and accept as reality about the world, themselves, and 'the other' (e.g.Bergsdóttir, 2016;Phillips, 2011).Even when our own experiences challenge their limited, ideological narratives-many are deeply colonial, racist

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.471
Threshold uncertainty score0.937

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal for the Study of Adult EducationSame topicCultural Industries and Urban DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207