PARTICIPATORY PRACTICES: OPEN CULTURE 2013, Arts Council England Project, We Curate @ Venice Biennale


Helen Weinstein has been working with partners in the Arts & Heritage sectors to better understand what ‘public participation’ means in the everyday world, how audiences for arts and culture, history and archaeology can continue to be diversified and be fully participatory, within the context of 'austerity': (the challenges and potential in undertaking this work in the current social and economic climate), and within the context of the 'digital transformation': (the opportunities and initiatives which make use of digital platforms and media to engage audiences and collections in ways that have the potential to be fully and equitably participatory in terms of sharing knowledge and shaping interpretations and narratives, - between academics and practitioners, - institutions and communities, - individual members of the public).

Helen has recently taken up an appointment on the AHRC Advisory Board for the Commissioning and Steering of a two-year "Cultural Value Project" which seeks to establish a framework that will advance the way in which we talk about the value of cultural engagement and the methods by which we evaluate that value, including an examination of the cultural experience itself and its impact on individuals and to society. A significant part of the ambition of the project is to articulate a set of evaluative approaches and methodologies suitable to assessing the different ways in which cultural value is manifested. To find out more about the AHRC Cultural Value Project, go to


Participatory Practices: How Can University Researchers and GLAM Professionals Improve Public Participation in Culture?

First, for those not familiar with "GLAM" - it is the shiny catch-all acronym for Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums. Secondly, there is a slight trap in our title question that highlights one of the key issues discussed at OPEN CULTURE 2013 - the public does not participate IN culture as if the two were separate.

Proper participatory practice enables the public to alter, do and make cultural material from the ground up. This requires sharing knowledge, creativity, power! The collections - all the stuff in our GLAMS - form the cultural building blocks; the rich, sedimented build up of millions of objects, each desperate for a new generation to give it a new story.

We see three crucial skillsets that University Researchers and GLAM professionals can share - to the benefit of both - and to better engage the public as active partners in their work. The founts of knowledge about cultural material within universities is unquestionable - it's what they are for! Universities also often have great specialism in the sorts of social research practice needed to identify & diversify audiences - & just to understand how best to engage with key audiences - particularly those less traditionally represented under GLAM roofs.

GLAM professionals - in addition to being guardians and experts in their own collections - have amazing education departments experienced at understanding & developing appropriate learning for different age groups - but also through community engagement experience and volunteer researcher projects - have a much greater facility at including researchers "at eye level" from beyond their own insitutions,  and also connecting their objects/narratives/research to non-experts (not something many university researchers can claim!).

These three elements - cultural knowledge, social research expertise, engagement skills - can be added together and become far more powerful. Each case of doing so may present unique challenges - but by collaborating within and between professions - we can also improve our practice as a whole.

Initial steps have already been made with the Collections Link "Supporting Practice in Participation" webspace. We would love to hear your thoughts on this growing, collaborative space and better still start adding your own comments and content!

You can get stuck in at the Portal itself & upload new content, & for general ideas, please email Helen Weinstein, the Project Manager of the SPP project via

The ‘Supporting Practice in Participation’ Portal

The portal can be accessed here:

The movement towards establishing open, participatory practice in museums is gaining momentum as an increasing number of heritage organisations seek to create more meaningful relationships with their audiences. 'Participation' in this context refers to activities in which either the community or external participants act together in collaborative decision-making, or those in which the organisation supports participants to pursue their own agenda. Participation is achieved through the democratization of power and the institutional support of user-led projects and agendas. Practices such as co-production, co-creation, co-curation, and shared interpretation are what constitute the values and central aspects of participatory practice, and as this momentum builds, there is in turn an increasing demand for material that relates to these practices. Nick Poole identifies this in his blog post ‘Sharing Participatory Practice’.

In response to the changes currently happening within museums, the Arts Council England funded project, entitled ‘Supporting Practice in Participation’, is providing support for the sector. The initiative is led by the Institute for the Public Understanding of the Past (IPUP) in collaboration with The Diversity in Heritage Group (DHG), The Collections Trust and The British Museum.

The project pools expertise about public participation into a single, user-friendly online portal. Designed for relatively new as well as established practitioners, it gathers a wide range of materials relating to participatory practice. In doing so it aims to support practitioners working throughout the cultural heritage sector, offering them a body of knowledge and experience which is both easily accessible and time-conserving.

A press release about the Arts Council Funding of the project can be found here:

Using The Portal And The Resources Within It

Hosted by Collections Link, the online intelligence hub run by The Collections Trust, the portal contains a growing collection of research materials and resources that relate to the core values stated above. It can be accessed directly via this link:

 Participation Portal Gateway

A diverse and extensive range of resources that relate to the various aspects of participatory practice are available within the portal. These include: academic articles; book chapters; reports; blog posts; podcasts; videos; websites and online exhibitions. Tagged in relation to their function, these resources cover policy, research, good practice and toolkits, case studies, evaluation and funding guidance. All of these tags are interactive and a click-through will locate the related materials under that tag or search term.

Drawing on relevant material from across the globe, each of these resources has a concisely and informative review of 200-500 words, written by Collections Link Reviewers. The focus of these reviews is on aspects most relevant to the practitioner’s needs. These can be found on the homepage of the portal or through searching by tags or keywords. A selection of the larger reviews are immediately accessible and will be become available in full once the user selects it.

Participation Portal Homepage

Short and concise, the reviews are sensitive to the needs and time pressures of those working both in academia and the heritage industry. Each review begins with a summary of the resource, articulates its relevance to participatory practice and indicates which aspects may be of most value to the reader. Based on this summative information, a visitor to the portal can bypass the time-consuming tasks of sourcing and accessing or purchasing reading materials which may not be of use to them. The SPP portal helps bridge the gap between research and practice by collating and assessing relevant materials for those that may not have the time to do so themselves. The portal currently hosts 72 reviews of individual resources and continues to grow.

Participation Portal Review Screenshot

Once the user has selected a resource they are able to access the full review, with accompanying bibliographic information. Each review has a direct link to the resource that it is referring to, accessible via the ‘Download’ or ‘Got to link’ button. Although many of the links will take you to an external website, sometimes leading you to a paywall, many will also allow you to download PDF copies of the resource, such as this one shown below.

Downloading Review Screenshot

The Supporting Practice in Participation project presents an immensely useful resource as The Collections Link Portal provides a central location for practitioners and academics to access content related to learning, guidance and experience that is directly relevant to those looking to implement participatory practice. The project offers a model that could be replicated for a range of disciplines where the constraints of academia and museum practice often prevent individuals from interacting with materials that could prove most useful to them.

The portal can be accessed here:

Supporting Practice in Participation - OPEN CULTURE 2013


Helen Weinstein will be joining with the Collections Trust for an important conference this summer, on 2nd/3rd July, speaking on 2nd July at the Kia Oval, in a panel entitled "Supporting Professional Practice in Diversity", find programme via link here:

"Supporting Practice in Participation" Arts Council England funds this participatory project with partners at IPUP, The Diversity in Heritage Group (DHG), The Collections Trust, & The British Museum

Arts Council England is funding a joint enterprise called "Supporting Practice in Participation" that aims to support museums and cultural heritage organizations wanting to forge participatory relationships with the public.  Helen developed the project as part of her portfolio of projects as Director of IPUP.  Helen is continuing to develop work on bridging research and practice in the field of participation and widening engagement with heritage.  Helen is the Project Manager for this collaborative project for the Arts Council funding, and Helen has strengthened the focus of this work in partnership with the Diversity in Heritage Group, The Collections Trust, and the British Museum.  The organizations in the partnership will scope, pilot and evaluate a user-friendly, research-rich data portal, and run a series of regional networking meetings. See Press Release about the Arts Council Funding at:

The Collections Link to host Supporting Practice in Participation (SPP) - you can find the first items uploaded here:

The Collections Trust and their Collections Link is the national network for professionals working in museums, libraries and archives run by the Collections Trust. The ‘Participation Portal’ will have maximum impact for sharing participatory practice, as the Collections Trust already provides crucial support to the cultural sector and engages with cultural collections and a wide group of users both in the UK and overseas. For the SPP project the partnership is working across the sector to collect resources for the portal on participation.  These can be articles, evaluations, case studies, reports, blogs, films, podcasts etc.

 See the blog written by Nick Poole, CEO of Collections Trust, about the launch of the Participation Portal:

The Participation Portal - Crowd Sourcing request

How you can help if you are coming to this page from a University, Publisher, Museum or Heritage Institution, or are a Freelancer/Consultant working in this area:

  • It would be excellent if the Collections Link’s Participation Portal can hold, or link to, resources produced as part of your research, or that of your colleagues. If you have some guidance or case studies on good participation that others can learn from please contribute to Collections Link: (category: crowd sourcing).  It would also be really good if you could put a call out among your networks for resources for the portal.

How Collections Link will acknowledge and promote your organisation:

  • Contributors will be credited on the Collections Link website and can also have a profile set up so that resources you have contributed are linked to you. See the example for DHG here:
  • If your resources are behind a paywall, we simply link to it and our short reviews give users an idea of how that resource can help them

What we mean by participation:

  • When we say participation, we mean only activities where the community or external participants share power with the organisation, ie where the participants and organisations are deciding together, acting together, or the organisation is supporting the participants to pursue their own agenda. So, for example, consultation would not be included unless it was clear that the group had decision-making control.
  • We are looking for guidance, case studies, evaluation or any other type of resource, in any format: film, blog, articles, reports, etc.
  • Key words that might guide you towards the type of resources we are looking for: power-sharing, empowerment, co-production, co-creation, co-curation, shared interpretation, involvement, democracy, civic empowerment, community led...

If you have any questions about contributing or linking to the Participatory Portal please be in direct touch with the Project Manager, therefore please do contact Helen directly via

Participatory Practice Presentation at the Venice Biennale: MIA RIDGE

BY Mia Ridge & Helen Weinstein

Mia Ridge

WeCu website: "We Curate" 

The Changing Roles of Cultural Institutions - blog by Mia Ridge on the Venice Biennale Presentations, an overview of "Participatory Practices:  Inclusion, Dialogue and Trust" & Reflections on the Venice conversations

On June 1, the first day of the 2013 Venice Biennale, a diverse group of artists, curators, academics and other museum practitioners gathered at the Sigma Foundation's Palazzo Donà, Campo San Polo, Venice, for two related conferences – 'Vision of Future - Postglobal Art' in the morning, and the 'We Curate' (WeCu) symposium in the afternoon. We entered through the exhibition in 'Pavilion 0' which included works from many of the artists present at the event.

The morning's 'Postglobal art' session included presentations from artists and curators from around the world; much of the discussion was concerned with 'changing the idea of how power works', the influence of capitalism and science on art and the role of art in society.

We Curate: Exploring New Forms of Inclusion, Participation and Trust

The afternoon session was the 'kick off' conference for the We Curate project, with an engaging programme of speakers {LINK TO PDF]. Josien Pieterse and Cas Bool introduced the WeCu project, which is exploring the changing role of arts organisations in society and aims to learn about existing forms of audience engagement, absorb new working practices from the project partners and finally develop a travelling exhibition that will incorporate everything they've learnt. We Curate is trying to connect museum practice to theory. By working with small, relatively young arts organisations without permanent legacy collections they're hoping to have more opportunities to tell new stories and to explore the impact of interventions early in the exhibition design process to introduce multivocality and new perspectives, in contrast to tacking them on alongside existing exhibitions.

The first presenter was Léontine Meijer-van Mensch who discussed 'participation(s), professionalism(s), critique of participation, negotiation'. She introduced the 'trias musealis' of curatorial, design and educational skills necessary for museums and discussed the 'participative turn' in heritage institutions in the 1970s, which later 'Web 2.0' paradigms and tools made even more important and accessible. 'Museum 2.0', which she characterised as 'communities of connected users' using networks as a platform, harnessing collective intelligence and collecting user-generated content, has been an important term in recent years. However, in the shift from museums working with 'source communities' to self-defined communities working together, the museum may not play the central role it did in the past. Conversely, she believes that in the networked 'Web 3.0' society of 'connected content', personalisation and 'heritage communities', museums professionals will be facilitators and information managers connecting people and data/heritage, and that the most interesting curators of modern art often also have affinities with artists and strong journalistic skills. She introduced Marcus Miessen's critique of participation but countered it with the assertion that public participation in heritage is about offering people a platform and negotiating or liaising between communities and the museum. Finally, Léontine highlighted the findings from the UK Museum's Association report on what the public want from museums that 'museums are guardians of factual information' and are not appropriate places to hold controversial debates, however she concluded that museums have an ethical obligation to offer participatory platforms, but that they must also be 'radically transparent' in their negotiations around that participation.

Participatory practices:  inclusion, dialogue and trust

I introduced my and Helen Weinstein's co-written talk on 'Participatory practices:  inclusion, dialogue and trust' (slides available) by explaining that it was itself an interdisciplinary product of our conversation about the journey of UK museums and academia towards inclusion, dialogue and trust. We began by setting out the landscape in the UK, which has similar issues with funding cuts, political changes, colonial legacies, and the short-termism of project funding as many parts of Europe. We then talked about UK academia's transition from 'knowledge transfer' to 'knowledge exchange', as (I think) both museums and academia have found it difficult to stop broadcasting at the public and start actually listening to and valuing their responses. The UK's transition to the 'research excellence framework' (REF) has meant academics want to be more inclusive and have greater public impact, yet they often don't have the skills to collaborate with public-facing organisations like museums in order to do so.  The original term, 'knowledge transfer', was a poor choice as it made dissemination sound like a mechanical process that could be tacked onto the end of a research project. 'Knowledge exchange' puts the emphasis on mutual exchange: it's only truly exchange if you receive ideas back, and if those ideas can change what you do. Academia can learn a lot about communication and engagement from museums, but there are fewer examples of successful collaboration between academia and museums than one might expect, perhaps because each group describes their work in different terms and report it in different platforms, which makes it difficult for people to know about or find each other's projects. However, there are examples of successful collaborative, multi-disciplinary projects as diverse as the Arts and Humanities Research Council-funded Beyond Text and the Jisc-funded Pelagios project.

Academics may need to invest substantial time in finding existing best practice or searching for past projects in museums, which may be documented only in communal memory rather than academic literature.  Other differences in approach may emerge during collaborations - museums are generally focused on getting something out on the gallery floor in time for the opening night, where academics may be more concerned with doing justice to their research question and how the project can be included in the 'research excellence framework' that determines their funding. However, the AHRC-funded Cultural Value Project seeks to establish a framework for discussing the value of arts and culture to society and for evaluating that value and should advance mutual understanding between related sectors. Helen's Institute for the Public Understanding of the Past (IPUP) programme also helps address this by mentoring young researchers working with museums to learn about public engagement. Other work across the university sector has been to focus on the next generation of scholars through a new PhD programme called "The Collaborative Doctoral Award" (CDA) whereby students have a supervisor in a university and a supervisor in a gallery, museum, archive, library &c. The student completes a research thesis, but also delivers a major piece of public engagement for their non higher education institution. So an example of a CDA from York is a collaborative doctoral award between the university and the York Art Gallery, with outputs including a major exhibition and public engagement activities such as walking trails. Another form of public engagement emerging in the UK is 'academic stand up' events like Bright Club where academics share their research in a funny way – great practice at translating research for different audiences.


We then discussed museums 'learning to let go'. I love the challenge in Dan Spock's quote from 'Museum Authority up for Grabs: The Latest Thing, or Following a Long Trend Line?': '[i]f you invite people to really participate in the making of a museum, the process must change the museum.' Learning to share authority is difficult for museums, but true collaboration and engagement is only possible when both sides are open to transformative experiences, including those that challenge existing interpretation.  It's difficult to find examples where museums have genuinely handed over control to audiences/co-curators – often they retain the right of refusal or shape decisions towards what they believe works for audiences. Sometimes this is for practical reasons (including hard-won lessons on conservation, visitor flow or audience research into the optimal label length) but doing so can reduce the agency of other participants. We looked at examples of museums working with the public to negotiate contested pasts, including the Museum of Free Derry collecting objects and stories with local communities in Northern Ireland, and Beamish Museum's moving beyond nostalgia to acknowledge local experiences related to the coal and steel industries through co-curating programmes like 'Remembering the Silksworth Evictions' with local history societies. Sometimes audiences can be less conservative than museums.

When discussing 'challenging curatorial practice', I touched briefly on Brooklyn Museum's crowdsourcing projects and their relationship to their mission to serve 'its diverse public as a dynamic, innovative, and welcoming center for learning through the visual arts' and a community's' 'right to narrate' their own histories and cultures. I also looked at artistic interventions in existing galleries as one way that museums in the UK are addressing contemporary issues within the longer cycle of updating entire galleries (using the example of Queering the Museum, an intervention in Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery by artist and curator Matt Smith, which as Shaheen pointed out is itself a reference to Fred Wilson's Mining the Museum), while acknowledging the risk of that these interventions, like other participatory projects, appear as window dressing that don't change the underlying ethos or knowledge of the institution. I closed with a more challenging question – can a museum really trust the public to decide what should be deaccessioned, as with the Georgia Museum of Art who are asking the public to help them decide which of their Bernard Smol paintings they should deaccession - and some 'provocations' for the later round table discussion: how will museums deal with the digital divide; climate change and food security; 3D printers in homes; globalism and localism; on-going financial crises; state eavesdropping and censorship; fundamentalist religion and secularism, and finally: what are museums for in 2013?


I'll never look at a chicken the same way again after artist Koen Vanmechelen's presentation on his Cosmopolitan Chicken Project. He pointed out that chicken breeds are made 'by mutation and manipulation', and breeds chickens from different countries together to 'give DNA an image'.

Shaheen Merali began his talk by saying that he found the notion of inclusive curation an 'interesting compost of ideas'. He problematised arguments for the 'consensual positives' by pointing out that histories of atrocities within cultures can be dismissed (e.g. in narratives about slavery), and the complicated relationship between 'self-esteem' and recovered histories which renders cultures 'clean, fresh, interesting, important' then gets people from source communities to come in and verify them. He questioned arts organisations' collective abilities to play 'a truthful role in propagating honesties about our collections' when most cultural spaces avoid asking awkward questions and 'end up calling something inclusivity then enshrining it later as heritage'.

The conference closed with a round table discussion (chaired by Wim Manuhutu) in which we heard

from other We Curate partners and people from the morning conference including Juraj ?arný, Karen Wyckmans, Laura Bertens, Izabela Kowalczyk, Tomasz Wendland and Jaros?aw Lubiak. The wide-ranging and at times heated discussion included potential models for curatorship in the twenty-first century, interrogated the 'trias musealis' Léontine had presented, the realities of 'permanently making mistakes', whether the new museology is transforming into reflexive museology, how curators might hold themselves accountable and conversely how they are exposed in being transparent about negotiating interactions between the public and arts organisations, the value of theory in informing curatorial practice, and thinking of museums as systems shaped by the people and times in which their collections and practices were created.


Reflections on We Curate, the challenges of collaboration and solidarity

One unexpected theme was the difficulty some of the curators and practitioners felt in finding time to reflect and learn when they're running from one project to the next. While working with academics may be one way to provide opportunities for reflection, or at least record the development of exhibitions as data for further study, collaborations between academics and practitioners can be difficult.

Looking to the future...

Apart from Léontine's presentation, there was very little mention of digital engagement, though the WeCu project plans to share their progress via their website. It would be interesting to see what would result if they engaged with existing online networks of technologists and educators re-thinking museum practice in communities like MCG (Museums Computer Group), MCN (US Museum Computer Network), GEM (Group for Education in Museums), DLNet (Digital Learning Network), museomix... (I don't know of equivalent groups in other parts of Europe but I'd love to learn of any you know of.)

From my perspective as Chair of the Museums Computer Group (a practitioner-led group that aims to connect, support and inspire museum technology professionals) and as a participant in an ad hoc international conversation among museum technologists about how to support professional development and training needs through 'job swaps' or residencies, I'm interested to see how the exchange program between We Curate project partners go. 

Overall, the We Curate project is asking important questions with an interesting methodology, and I'm looking forward to following the progress of their further exchanges and exhibitions.

Author biography on the Venice Biennale Blog re "Participatory Practices: Inclusion, Dialogue, & Trust in Museums & Academia

Mia Ridge

Mia Ridge is currently researching a PhD in digital humanities (Department of History, Open University), focusing on focusing on historians and scholarly crowdsourcing. Mia has published and presented widely on her key areas of interest including: user experience design, human-computer interaction, open cultural data, audience engagement and crowdsourcing in the cultural heritage sector.

Formerly Lead Web Developer at the Science Museum Group, Mia has worked internationally as a business analyst, digital consultant and web programmer in the cultural heritage and commercial sectors. Mia has post-graduate qualifications in software development (RMIT University, 2001) and an MSc in Human-Centred Systems (City University, London, 2011). Editor of the forthcoming volume ‘Crowdsourcing our Cultural Heritage’, she tweets at and blogs at

How can Collections Management power the Participatory Museum of tomorrow?




How can Collections Management power the Participatory Museum of tomorrow?

Cutting-edge conference programme

More than 30 expert speakers 

The Kia Oval, London 

This year’s programme is the most ambitious yet, with a final line up of more than 30 expert international and UK speakers. It comprises plenary presentations, parallel content strands, Quickfire Updates, the Securitas Security Seminar, and the SPECTRUM Local Community Gathering.

It is an exceptional line up for the collections community’s Event of the Year.


2 July 2013

10.00 – 10.15

Nick Poole

Welcome from the Collections Trust

CEO Collections Trust


Scott Furlong

Welcome from Arts Council England

Director, Acquisitions, Exports, Loans and Collect, Arts Council England

10.15 – 11.00

The Increase and Diffusion of Knowledge: Opening up information at the Smithsonian

Deron Burba

Chief Information Officer, Smithsonian Institution

11.30 – 13.00

The Digital Transformation

Projects and initiatives which make use of digital platforms and media to engage audiences with collections.

Chair: Stuart Dempster

Director, Strategic Content Alliance, JISC

14.15 – 15.15

Participatory Collections Management

Chair: Martin Harrison-Puttnam

Senior Curator, London Transport Museum

Supporting Professional Practice in Diversity Panellists:

Helen Weinstein

Founding Director, IPUP: The Institute for the Public Understanding of the Past

Nick Stanhope

Chief Executive, Historypin

Timothy Vickers

Collections Care Officer, Luton Culture

followed by Panel Q&A conversation with panellists and delegates

15.15 – 15.45

Quickfire Updates: Participatory Projects

Facilitator: Nick Stanhope


15.45 – 16.15

A quick round-up from those working on five cutting-edge participatory projects


Cultural Equalities Now: Conference Organized at The British Museum

Helen Weinstein has a long track record of collaboration with the Diversity in Heritage Group, and working in partnership with the British Museum. As Director of IPUP, Helen co-organized a major conference entitled ‘Cultural Equalities Now’ in London. The event gathered together both practitioners and academics to explore the future directions for the equality and diversity agenda in the cultural and arts sectors. The conference was addressed by a range of speakers including Baroness Estelle Morris, Baroness Lola Young, Sandy Nairne, Mark O’Neill and Bernadette Lynch, all of whom reflected back on their own practice and how it was related to increasing and diversifying audience participation.

Helen Weinstein in Conversation with Estelle Morris, part 1

Helen Weinstein in Conversation with Estelle Morris, part 2

Director of Glasgow Life, Mark O'Neill's keynote: "Values Based Practice In a Time of Policy Change" - listen on audioboo:

Director of National Portrait Gallery, Sandy Nairne's keynote:

Further Reading on Participatory Practices & Engagement with Cultural Heritage

Arnstein, Sherry R. 1969. “A Ladder of Citizen Participation.” JAIP35 (4) (July): 216–224.


Bernstein, Shelley. 2009. “Crowdsourcing the Clean-Up with Freeze Tag!” Brooklyn Museum: Community: Bloggers@brooklynmuseum. May 21.


Bonney, Rick, Heidi Ballard, Rebecca Jordan, Ellen McCallie, Tina Phillips, Jenifer Shirk, and Candie C. Wilderman. 2009. “Public Participation in Scientific Research: Defining the Field and Assessing Its Potential for Informal Science Education. A CAISE Inquiry Group Report”. Washington D.C.: Center for Advancement of Informal Science Education (CAISE).


Bruno, Elena. 2011. “Smithsonian Crowdsourcing Since 1849!” Smithsonian Institution Archives. April 14.



Dougherty, Jack, and Kristen Nawrotzki. 2013. “Writing History in the Digital Age?» Part 2: The Wisdom of Crowds(ourcing).” In Writing History in the Digital Age, edited by Jack Dougherty and Kristen Nawrotzki. Accessed April 28.


Dunn, Stuart, and Mark Hedges. “Connected Communities: Crowd Sourcing in the Humanities: A Scoping Study.”


Proctor, Nancy. 2010. “Digital: Museum as Platform, Curator as Champion, in the Age of Social Media.”Curator: The Museum Journal53 (1) (January): 35–42.


Proctor, Nancy. 2013. “Crowdsourcing-an Introduction: From Public Goods to Public Good.”Curator: The Museum Journal56 (1) (January 7): 105–106. doi:10.1111/cura.12010.


Ridge, Mia. 2011a. “Playing with Difficult Objects – Game Designs to Improve Museum Collections.” In Museums and the Web 2011: Proceedings, edited by Jennifer Trant and David Bearman. Toronto, Canada: Archives & Museum Informatics.


Ridge, Mia. 2011b. “My Europeana Tech Keynote: Open for Engagement: GLAM Audiences and Digital Participation.” Open Objects.


Ridge, Mia. 2012a. “Frequently Asked Questions About Crowdsourcing in Cultural Heritage.” Open Objects.


Ridge, Mia. 2012b. “Designing for Participatory Projects: Emergent Best Practice, Getting Discussion Started.” Open Objects.


Ridge, Mia. 2013. “On the Trickiness of Crowdsourcing Competitions: Some Lessons from Sydney Design.” Open Objects.


Rosenzweig, Roy. 2006. “Can History Be Open Source? Wikipedia and the Future of the Past.” The Journal of American History93 (1) (June): 117–46.


Saxton, Martha. 2012. “Wikipedia and Women’s History: A Classroom Experience.” Writing History in the Digital Age.


Spock, Daniel. 2009. “Museum Authority up for Grabs: The Latest Thing, or Following a Long Trend Line?” Exhibitionist(Fall): 6–10.

Archaeology & Community: Conference with Michael Wood & Practitioners & Volunteers

Archaeology in the Public Realm

Helen has also worked with colleague, Adam Gutteridge, in collaboration with community archaeologists, both professionals and volunteers, culminating in a one-day conference organized by Adam called, 'Archaeology and the Public Realm', where Helen invited TV Presenter Michael Wood to talk about his experience of translating the past onto TV, in particular his recent BBC series filmed with the villagers in Kibworth.  For the conference, community archaeology participants shared the podium with Michael Wood and talked of the drivers that lay behind their desire to actively engage with the past.  You can read a summary of the conference, hosted by IPUP and the Department of Archaeology at the University of York, here: Archaeology and the Public Realm

More Flickr Photos of Michael Wood & Conference:



On this page ...