MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6996566228

Small museums on Vancouver Island as agents of change

2021· dissertation· en· W6996566228 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUVic’s Research and Learning Repository (University of Victoria) · 2021
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMuseums and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrivilege (computing)EthnographyVariety (cybernetics)Participant observationPower (physics)Work (physics)Diversity (politics)Embodied cognition
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explored how workers in two small museums on Vancouver Island were responding curatorially and pedagogically to the social issues of our times. It was inspired from my own work in a small museum, as well as the idea that museums can be agents of change in our deeply troubled world. Specifically, I investigated how these small museum workers integrated new critical and creative practices into their daily work and the challenges and constraints they faced. Adopting institutional ethnography as inquiry, I used interviews, participant observation and focus groups to explore how the study participants navigated community relations, historical discourses, exclusions and institutional restrictions. My findings show the participants tackling issues of power and privilege by enacting cultural democracy through shared curatorial authority; actively engaging with a diversity of communities; integrating women’s lives and issues in the exhibits; using the archives to share lesser-known histories; and employing a variety of aesthetic and embodied practices to raise awareness and engage community. While some visitors and members were resistant to the changes, my study suggests that most welcomed the new stories and practices, which speaks to how the participants mobilisd pedagogies of challenge and care. Challenges remained in the forms of a gendered bureaucracy; lack of funding; and job precarity. I conclude this study with recommendations for how small museums might be further supported in this important curatorial and pedagogical work. These include the development of regional and collaborative learning frameworks; the re-imagining of governance; and the adoption of ‘decent work’ principles in these institutions.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.628
Threshold uncertainty score0.739

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0240.013
Scholarly communication0.0110.002
Open science0.0020.011
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUVic’s Research and Learning Repository (University of Victoria)Same topicMuseums and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207