MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1559236014

School Libraries as Panaceas for Mass Failure in West African Senior School Certificate Examinations in Nigeria

2013· article· en· W1559236014 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Cln Felix A. Adewusi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournals & Books Hosting (International Knowledge Sharing Platform) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Administration
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQueen's UniversityAdekunle Ajasin UniversityStrongNew York State Education DepartmentMicrosoft
KeywordsPanacea (medicine)CertificateNewspaperSchool CertificateMathematics educationSchool libraryPolitical scienceLibrary scienceMedical educationPsychologyMedicineMathematicsLawComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper attempted to explain school libraries as reliable and dependable panaceas for mass failure in West African Examination Council Senior School Certificate Examinations (WAEC SSCE).The paper began with an introduction highlighting various comments and views on reports of mass failure in SSCE in recent years in Nigeria.This was followed by providing a brief on the concept of West African Examination Council.Percentages of students that passed SSCE from 2008 to 2012 with five credits including English Language and Mathematics were obtained from newspapers and online reports and shown in tables to confirm the claim of mass failure of students in the WAEC examinations in recent years.School libraries and their capacity to improve student performance were discussed.Some recommendations were made as regards putting in place world class school libraries in Nigerian schools and committing them to regular use by the students for success in examinations.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournals & Books Hosting (International Knowledge Sharing Platform)Same topicLibrary Science and AdministrationFrench-language works237,207