MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2321849538 · doi:10.1515/libri-2014-0031

Trends and Developments in the Literature on Community Libraries in Africa

2014· article· en· W2321849538 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueLibri · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Administration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Conceptual frameworkEmpirical researchReading (process)SituatedFunction (biology)Academic communitySubject (documents)SociologyPublic relationsLibrary sciencePolitical scienceSocial scienceComputer scienceGeographyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Community libraries in Africa are growing in number, and are increasingly subject to academic research. The literature on community libraries spans 30 years, and this review shows how there has been a shift from conceptual to empirical publications. The early, conceptual literature stressed that community libraries should be by and for the community, support development, actively reach out, and provide relevant materials. These publications can to some extent be seen as reactions to the colonial legacy that national library services carried on after independence. The empirical research was analyzed using Kuhlthau’s (1999) framework for school libraries as a starting point. The major function of this framework is to provide a meta-analysis of the research, and further to relate this meta-analysis to the larger context in which this research is situated. The empirical literature reported mainly on student use. Much of the literature addressed lower-level issues, skills and outcomes, such as materials offered or borrowed, increased reading, and change in attitudes. However, limited attention was given to utilisation as an outcome. Attempts to find a causal relationship between library use and improved grades have been inconclusive. A major limitation of this framework is that it does not address the community aspect of these libraries that the empirical literature emphasized. This dual aspect of community libraries merits further exploration, and there is a need to develop theoretical frameworks that fit better with the realities of African communities and their libraries. There is also need for more research comparing community libraries across countries as well as within countries. The scholarly significance of this study is that is provides a comprehensive, critical review of the literature on community libraries in Africa and identifies caveats in the research literature. This will support future research on community libraries in Africa, an under-researched area.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.584
Threshold uncertainty score0.326

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.241 · 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