Programming Process Pedagogy: Towards Meaningful Audience Engagement and Public Participation Models Within Contemporary Canadian Media Arts Festival, 2012-2024
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 2010s are remembered as a decade of interventionist participative engagements that were led in large part by youth- and collective-oriented forms of meaningful online civic activism. Motivated by affective politics of belonging, these movements also contributed to building lucrative neoliberal participation-based social media platforms, powered by algorithms of misinformation. During this time, the Canada Council for the Arts (CCA) published a formative 2012 Discussion Paper entitled “Public Engagement in the Arts,” which encouraged Canadian cultural programming to consciously engage more public audiences in the social aspects of the arts through programming updates that more readily facilitated co-creation, learning, cultural mediation, and creative self-expression. I engage with this heightened period of participative affect to investigate the social, economic, and civic impacts of “meaningful engagement” programming within the Canadian independent media arts ecosystem from the early 2010s to the mid 2020s. Led in large part by participative curatorial tactics, this dissertation investigates how these directives impacted concentrated groups of identity-based communities and changed a number of programming parameters within Canadian media arts festivals. Demonstrating how participation narratives have become central curatorial tactics within contemporary Canadian media arts film festivals, I posit a theoretical intervention in the Canadian media arts festival ecosystem. It considers the boundaries, stakes, and directives for publics, audiences, and creative ecology ecosystems across these festival initiatives. Working through ethnographic life-story research that is contextualized within discursive cultural policy analysis, this dissertation presents original research from four primary media arts festival case studies to present a contemporary theory of screen engagement called “public process pedagogy.” I argue that this theory of participation is not only found but expected within granting and programming directives for contemporary community-based media-arts festivals within Canada. Importantly, I do not consider or judge this theory of participation from a moral perspective. Rather, I recognize how public process pedagogy is influenced by complicated neoliberal and settler-colonial tensions. In turn, this dissertation presents more sustainable frameworks of evaluation for participation-based programming within this contemporary media arts ecosystem.
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 | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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".