Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper comes out of a month-long case study of information literacy education in two public libraries in a small South African town in the rural province of Mpumalanga, undertaken in October 2004. The participant observation study is the second phase of a twophase mixed methods study, which explores the capacity of public libraries in South Africa for information literacy education – in the context of the dire shortage of school libraries. The focus in the second phase is on the connections between public libraries and schools. However, the relations between the two libraries and their staff members are found to impact on these relations - with the study finding that historical context impacts significantly on library programming. The paper concentrates, however, on just two threads of enquiry: the views of teachers and principals in the seven schools of the town on the educational role of libraries as revealed in interviews; and pupils’ use of the two public libraries in seeking information for their school assignments. The study reveals a lack of cognizance of the high level demands of information-seeking in libraries among the teachers. They tend to see the library as a warehouse from which things are “fetched”. The study finds a paradox – a gulf certainly exists between the public libraries and schools but the gulf comes from shared limited conceptions of the educational role of public libraries and of information literacy. The intense gaze of the participant observation contributes a nuanced understanding of the challenges for information literacy education in South Africa.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".