MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2463394480 · doi:10.1177/0961000616654961

Motivations for choosing librarianship as a second career among students at the University of British Columbia and the University of Hong Kong

2016· article· en· W2463394480 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

VenueJournal of Librarianship and Information Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLibrary scienceSociologyField (mathematics)Career PathwaysPerceptionGraduate studentsCareer developmentPedagogyPsychologyMedical educationMedicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pathway to a career in the Library and Information Science field is rarely straightforward and unidirectional, but is often multi-faceted, with many circuitous detours along the way. There has been an increasing number of second-career in LIS emerging from many other non-LIS-related professions over the years. Many of these newcomers have made significant contributions to the LIS profession as they transfer their years of professional experiences, expertise, knowledge and skills from their former careers into the field. The purpose of this paper is to understand the perceptions and perspectives of the LIS students, and the various factors that influenced these midlife graduate students to consider switching from their current occupations to LIS as a second career.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.066
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.206 · 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