MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W143125040 · doi:10.29173/slw6821

What is the impact of the school library on pupils' personal development? A case study of a secondary school in Northern Ireland

2007· article· en· W143125040 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Francesca Fodale, Jessica Bates

Bibliographic record

VenueSchool Libraries Worldwide · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Education Studies and Reforms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSchool libraryDisadvantagedPsychologyMedical educationNorthern irelandReading (process)Positive Youth DevelopmentPedagogyPersonal developmentLiteracyMathematics educationSociologyLibrary scienceDevelopmental psychologyMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

What is the perceived impact of the school library on pupils' personal development? This paper reports on a case study of a secondary school (all girls, 11-18 years) in a disadvantaged area in Belfast, Northern Ireland. The study explores the impact of the school library in terms of personal development, and seeks to answer the question of how best to evaluate impact in this regard. Interviews and postal questionnaires are used to collect data from both school staff and parents. Data collected from the interviews with school staff show that staff regarded the school library as having a positive impact on pupils' motivation to learn, and on their self-esteem and personal confidence during both formal learning activities in the library and periods of free access. The results of the survey of parents show that parents perceived that the activities of the school library contributed positively to pupils' attitudes towards reading and the development of literacy skills.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSchool Libraries WorldwideSame topicDiverse Education Studies and ReformsFrench-language works237,207