MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2118998423 · doi:10.18438/b8zc88

Identifying the Visible Minority Librarians in Canada: A National Survey

2015· article· en· W2118998423 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.
venuePublié dans une revue dont le pays d'attache est le Canada.
aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.

Notice bibliographique

RevueEvidence Based Library and Information Practice · 2015
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueLibrary Science and Administration
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Saskatchewan
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDemographicsMulticulturalismLibrary scienceMedical educationPsychologyPublic relationsPolitical scienceSociologyMedicineComputer sciencePedagogy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract
 
 Objective – This paper is based on a national survey conducted in late 2013 by the authors, then co-moderators of the Visible Minority Librarians of Canada (ViMLoC) Network of the Canadian Library Association (CLA). It is a first survey of its kind, aiming to capture a snapshot of the demographics of the visible minority librarians working in Canadian institutions. The authors hoped that the data collected from the survey and the analysis presented in this paper would help identify the needs, challenges and barriers of this group of librarians and set future directions for ViMLoC. The authors also hoped that the findings would be useful to library administrators, librarians, and researchers working on multicultural issues, diversity, recruitment and retention, leadership, library management, and other related areas. 
 
 Methods – An online survey questionnaire was created and the survey invitation was sent to visible minority librarians through relevant library association electronic mail lists and posted on ViMLoC’s electronic mail list and website. The survey consisted of 12 questions: multiple-choice, yes/no questions, and open-ended. The survey asked if the participants were visible minority librarians. If they responded “No,” the survey closed for them. Respondents who did not identify themselves as minority librarians were excluded from completing the survey. 
 
 Results – Of the 192 individuals that attempted, 120 who identified themselves as visible minority librarians completed the survey. Of these, 36% identified themselves as Chinese, followed by South Asian (20%) and Black (12%). There were 63% who identified themselves as first generation visible minorities and 28% who identified themselves as second generation. A total of 84% completed their library degree in Canada. Equal numbers (38% each) identified themselves as working in public and academic libraries, followed by 15% in special libraries. Although they are spread out all over Canada and beyond, a vast majority of them are in British Columbia (40%) and Ontario (26%). There were 38% who identified themselves as reference/information services librarians, followed by “other” (18%) and “liaison librarian” (17%). A total of 82% responded that they worked full time. The open-ended question at the end of the survey was answered by 42.5% of the respondents, with responses falling within the following broad themes: jobs, mentorship, professional development courses, workplace issues, general barriers, and success stories. 
 
 Conclusions – There are at least 120 first, second, and other generation minority librarians working in (or for) Canadian institutions across the country and beyond. They work in different kinds of libraries, are spread out all over Canada, and have had their library education in various countries or in Canada. They need a forum to discuss their issues and to have networking opportunities, and a mentorship program to seek advice from other librarians with similar backgrounds who have been in similar situations to themselves when finding jobs or re-pursuing their professional library degrees. Getting support from and working collaboratively with CLA, ViMLoC can be proactive in helping this group of visible minority librarians.

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.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCommunication savante
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,852
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,992

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,005
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,328
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,089
Tête enseignante GPT0,324
Écart entre enseignants0,236 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle