Bibliographic record
Abstract
At a time when students are increasingly turning to the Web as their primary source of information it is well worth continuing to consider ways and means of taking advantage of this trend, and to perhaps relocate attention to traditional information sources presented in new ways. This paper makes the case that Open Access to electronic scholarly journals creates an opportunity for schools and school libraries to benefit from use of these journals. Furthermore, the article describes work being done by the Public Knowledge Project in creating a technical infrastructure for the creation and use of Web-based electronic journals through the development of the Open Journal Systems, and the ongoing development of an interactive reading environment for these journals. the students, and for signs that they are engaging with the material being presented to them. Checking for evidence that things are sinking in often results in appeals, on my part, for comments, or perhaps direct questioning about (what I think) are the most interesting and/or salient aspects of the topic at hand. In the past, results from these quick surveys were mixed depending on, among numerous other factors, how many of the assigned readings were read, or how well presented the lecture happened to be that day. In my experience, a noticeable trend over the last few years has been a steady increase in the number of unsolicited questions and comments brought forward by students during the course of lectures. Perhaps, with increasing experience and attendance at teaching and academic growth workshops, the quality of instruction has simply gotten better. As true as this might be, an equally plausible explanation may be found in the coincident increase in the students' use of laptop computers during class. Facilitating note-taking seemed an obvious explanation at first, but the number and depth of questions really began to increase with the introduction of campus-wide wireless Internet service. Once confirmed, it became all too obvious what had happened. Students were using the Web to search for materials relevant to the topic of the lecture. They were checking facts, accessing university library resources that provided added value to the points being made in the lecture, surfing for related sites on the Web, and instant messaging with their colleagues while class was going on. The result was a manifest increase in the level of interaction with the information being covered, evidenced by an increased number of pointed, and often articulate and insightful questions and comments on the lecture material. Copyright of works published in School Libraries Worldwide is jointly held by the author(s) and by the International Association of School Librarianship. The author(s) retain copyright of their works, but give permission to the International Association of School Librarianship to reprint their works in collections or other such documents published by or on behalf of the International Association of School Librarianship. Author(s) who give permission for their works to be reprinted elsewhere should inform the Editor of School Libraries Worldwide and should ensure that the following appears with the article. Reprinted, with permission, from School Libraries Worldwide Volume 14, Number 2, July 2008, pages 45-54.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.035 | 0.127 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".