Imagining museum futures through community-centered curating : representation with and by Chinese Canadian communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The dissertation is inspired by the concept of relational curating in art galleries and re-orients this work by examining the role and impact of community-centered curation in museums. It supports meaning-making and representation of racialized communities by addressing their long-standing marginalization and disempowerment in museum spaces. A greater understanding of the relationalities within curatorial practice can help museums develop more effective and socially-just forms of engagement and representation that will resonate with racialized community groups and visitors. Theories of museum meaning-making and representation were central to the interpretation of data. When examined through the lens of representation and affect, research on meaning-making sheds light on the aspirations and experiences of racialized peoples during museum encounters. The study analyzes exhibition team members and visitors' meaning-making experiences by studying how people engage, empathize and experience empowerment in museums. The intrinsic qualitative case study, informed by phenomenographic methodology, examines a single multi-sited temporary exhibition primarily through qualitative interviews with exhibition team members and visitors of A Seat at the Table: Chinese Immigration and British Columbia, presented at the Museum of Vancouver (MOV) and the Chinese Canadian Museum of British Columbia (CCM) in 2020-2023. The exhibition, one of the largest museum exhibitions on Chinese Canadian history to date, showcased the lived experiences of Chinese Canadians over the past century through the lens of food, racism, and activism. The analysis demonstrates how theories of meaning-making and community-centered curating can collectively help museums better conceptualize the values and needs of museum visitors. It enables researchers to develop culturally informed curatorial processes of exhibition development as it relates to the representation of racialized communities. This research also draws on the researcher’s self-reflections as the exhibition co-curator, which forms the basis for her reflective praxis as a racialized museum curator.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.039 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".