MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4256005626 · doi:10.29173/iasl8162

Combined School/Public Libraries in Israel at the High School Level: Some Results of an Exploratory Field Study

2021· article· en· W4256005626 sur OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Miriam Hiram, Moshe Yitzhaki

Notice bibliographique

RevueIASL Annual Conference Proceedings · 2021
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueLibrary Science and Administration
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésSchool libraryPrincipal (computer security)Scale (ratio)Sample (material)Library scienceEmpirical researchExploratory researchControl (management)Medical educationPolitical sciencePsychologySociologyMedicineGeographyComputer scienceManagementSocial scienceMathematicsEconomics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The issue of combined school-public libraries has long concerned researchers and practitioners in the field and is well documented in literature. A literature survey reveals opinion articles as well as empirical field studies, especially in the US, Canada, UK, Australia and Germany, which attempt to determine the advantages and disadvantages of this model, and possible factors associated with its success in practice. Despite the importance of the topic and its potential of budget savings and greater efficiency in use of resources, no large-scale empirical study of the extent and performance of combined school-public libraries in Israel has been conducted. The study aimed to empirically investigate the combined school-public libraries on the high school level existing in Israel. The main research tools were three different written closed questionnaires sent to the school librarian, school principal and one of the school teachers. In 1996 questionnaires were mailed to all 65 schools known to have some type of combination libraries: 26 had a combined school-public library, while in the remaining 39 schools the library was a branch of a regional or municipal public library. Questionnaires were also mailed to 40 randomly-chosen schools, having a 'regular' (i.e. not combined) library, to serve as a control group. Response rate was about 50% and the final sample included 51 libraries: 18 -combined, 11-'branches', and 22-'regular' ones. Main findings were: the number of combined libraries has risen constantly over the decades which seems to be an interesting trend, especially in view of the recent decline reported in the US and Canada. Regarding space and seats the situation in the regional libraries was much better than in the urban ones. Concerning opening hours the urban combined libraries were open longer than the regional combined ones and the control group. The combined libraries, mainly the urban ones, were open for more afternoon hours, all of them were open during school vacations, and they had a higher average number of weekly librarian hours per school. Regional combined libraries had a much larger number of books per student and periodicals and computers per library than the urban combined ones and the control group. The mean number of users of the reading-room was about the same (usually low) in all types of libraries in afternoon hours, but differed considerably in the mornings, probably due to different teaching methods. About half the librarians, the school principals and the teachers in the combined libraries rated their combined library as 'very successful', while the rest rated it as only 'partially successful', or expressed dissatisfaction, pointing out serious problems. Regional librarians were much more satisfied with the combined model, compared to their urban colleagues. Findings indicated that the combined model is more likely to succeed in a regional library, in a rural setting, than in an urban one.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,007
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,014
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,035

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0070,007
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0050,004
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0040,003
Communication savante0,0030,002
Science ouverte0,0010,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0050,001

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 Opus0,079
Tête enseignante GPT0,307
Écart entre enseignants0,228 · 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

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2021
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueIASL Annual Conference ProceedingsMême sujetLibrary Science and AdministrationTravaux en français237 207