MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116982215 · doi:10.5860/crl.61.6.510

Information Literacy Instruction in Canadian Academic Libraries: Longitudinal Trends and International Comparisons

2000· article· en· W2116982215 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCollege & Research Libraries · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformation literacyLiteracyWork (physics)Library instructionFace (sociological concept)Library scienceMedical educationMathematics educationPolitical sciencePsychologyPedagogySociologyComputer scienceSocial scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A national survey of information literacy instruction in Canadian academic libraries revealed that trends in teaching objectives, methods, and content have changed little in the past five years. Instructional librarians continue to face numerous challenges, particularly with regard to limited resources and faculty and student attitudes. Although more than half of the libraries believe they are meeting their instructional objectives, only a minority actually record their objectives formally and evaluation of instructional success remains mostly informal. Findings from the survey are compared with an earlier Canadian study and with similar work done in the United States and New Zealand.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.787
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.096
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.316 · 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