MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W919989963

Editorial: Great Piles of Stuff or Piles of Great Stuff? Entrepreneurial Curation and the School Librarian

2014· editorial· en· W919989963 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marcia A. Mardis

Notice bibliographique

RevueSchool Libraries Worldwide · 2014
Typeeditorial
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésContext (archaeology)Promotion (chess)Public relationsSchool librarySociologyQuality (philosophy)PedagogyPolitical scienceComputer scienceLibrary sciencePolitics
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Welcome to the 20th Anniversary issue of School Libraries Worldwide! For these last two decades, it has been our pleasure to bring you the finest school library research from across the globe. The theme of this issue, Curation: Building the Learning Resource Base through Selection, Management, and Promotion of School Library Collections, was prompted by the fact that K-12 instructional planning is changing-and continues to change very quickly. Whereas teachers were once left to their own devices, and hopefully to their school librarians, to identify and integrate high quality learning resources, the recent past of federal educational initiatives has transformed instructional materials selection from one based on pull (i.e., resources gained from colleagues, search engines, and specialized digital libraries) to one based on push (e.g., resources presented to teachers in the context of a standards and assessment linked student data systems or a digital library). This fundamental change in the way teachers base their instructional plans in the United States stems from two main forces: shift to the Common Core State Standards and Next Generation Science Standards and their accompanying shift high stakes testing based on students' aptitude for applying concepts. With these twin imperatives reinforced in federal education policy via the Elementary and Secondary Education Act authorization known as No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and the related Race to the Top (RttT) initiative, school administrators are left to make tough decisions about how to shift financial resources to ensure that their teachers have sufficient means to implement high quality instruction as defined by federal guidelines.Unfortunately, too often, school administrators have identified school librarians as surplus to their educational goals (Ellerson, 2012a; 2012b). Instead, they have relied upon commercial systems populated with fee-based resources to provide teachers' essential materials base (Maull, Salidvar, & Sumner, 2010a; 2010b). Some of these systems are operationalized as digital textbooks that represent assemblages of resources tailored to a specific learning goal, also known as digital textbooks.Many digital textbooks are based on OERs, which are teaching, learning, and research resources that reside in the public domain or have been released under an intellectual property license that permits their free use and re-purposing by others (Hewlett Foundation, 2007, p.1]. School librarians are being eliminated at a time when their expertise in identifying, organizing, maintaining, and promoting (i.e., curating) high quality Open Education Resources (OERs) could provide the content and support upon which teacher and student achievement could be based. Perhaps as a result, compliance with federal encouragements to embrace OERs has been piecemeal and slow (Porcello & Hsi, 2013).Certainly, identifying and aggregating OERs and other digital resources are two key aspects of 21st Century collection development. However, due to the sheer number of these items, curation is crucial to ensure that evolving definitions of quality are reflected in the collection (Rosenbaum, 2013).I posit that curation is an entrepreneurial activity. As Goldstein and Rodriguez (2012) pointed out, entrepreneurs are innovative problem solvers. The heritage of librarianship is inherently translational in that librarians take the position of layering information resources onto possible solutions for problems in just about any discipline. The librarian's approach is constantly fresh, constantly reinventing, and constantly injecting expertly selected information into potentially insurmountable quests for knowledge. In this way, LIS education fosters information entrepreneurialism through the development of the resource expertise enacted through curation.Moreover, the growing array of resource types demands expertise not only in identifying high quality or trustworthy resources, but also curation means recommending the right resource in both content and format. …

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 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)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,015
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche, Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Études des sciences et des technologies, Communication savante, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesCommunication savante
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Éditorial · Signal consensuel: Éditorial
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,032
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,015
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,003
Communication savante0,0020,027
Science ouverte0,0020,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

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 Opus0,009
Tête enseignante GPT0,258
Écart entre enseignants0,249 · 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; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreÉditorial

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

En bref

Citations1
Publié2014
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueSchool Libraries WorldwideMême sujetLibrary Science and Information LiteracyTravaux en français237 207