Early British Public Library Annual Reports: Then and Now Part I
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Of the 566 library authorities functioning in Britain and Ireland by 1918, most seem to have published annual reports on their progress, at least at some point following their establishment. So far as they survive and can be traced, these documents, though varying greatly in length, commonly contain a narrative or textual commentary on the progress of the institutions during the report period, statistical and tabular details about the institutions such as information regarding stock, issues, and borrowers, and lists of data such as committee members, donations received and periodicals taken. Some published annual reports documenting the working of public libraries also contain data as to the progress of allied cultural institutions such as museums, art galleries, technical and adult education facilities, and parks and recreation grounds. They were often signed by the local public library committee chairman and addressed to a local council, although some were signed by a librarian or curator and addressed to the library or other committee. In both cases they were accessible to members of the public, and it seems fair to assume that the staff of the institution concerned would commonly have had a hand in their writing. Following the acquisition by the Thomas Parry Library at the University of Wales Aberystwyth of a large collection of historic public library annual reports which the Library Association was on the verge of discarding, the AHRB (Arts and Humanities Research Board) agreed to fund a fifteen-month project between April 2000 and July 2001 to examine the utility of these documents to historians of the period ca. 1850–1919. In view of the lack of thematic historical work on public library annual reports (and indeed on annual reports as a wider genre), this two-part essay will address the genesis and character of these documents from a broad perspective, and assess their impact and significance for contemporaries and for historians in a range of disciplines. After describing the evolution of the public library annual report as a genre, this first paper will discuss the nature of their use to date, and will argue that current common historiographical assumptions as to the limited utility of these documents are flawed. The second paper will assess the value and contemporary importance of the documents in the expansion of the public library movement.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,017 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,008 | 0,016 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,014 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,119 | 0,070 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».