MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2587635131 · doi:10.1080/10572317.2017.1270693

The Library Leaders Institute: Building Mindful Leaders

2017· article· en· W2587635131 on OpenAlexaffabout
Vicki Whitmell

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Information & Library Review · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Canadian institutionsLegislative Assembly of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcknowledgementBlueprintSociologyLeadership developmentProfessional developmentPublic relationsAudience measurementManagementPolitical scienceMedia studiesLawPedagogyVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Column Editor's NotesAt any stage of the professional life cycle (early, mid, or late career) we all have experiences of leadership, be they good and/or bad. This feature column, written by Vicki Whitmell (Canadian founder of the Library Leaders Institute—LLI) provides for the record a very personal account of taking an opportunity to lead from where she stands and give to others a positive and supportive leadership learning opportunity.John Fitzgerald Kennedy, the 35th president of the United States of America, in his inauguration speech in 1961, made an impassioned and memorable call to action for the nation to do what is right for the greater good. His words, slightly modified with reference to your profession not your country resonate as I read and reflect on Whitmell's account of the LLI. Her description, observations, and reflections provide a very personal account of her contributions for the greater good of the library profession, through the LLI.Through the focus of this column, I am pleased to bring this story of the evolution of the LLI to the professional literature and to the attention of our international readership. Publication of the LLI story provides acknowledgement of the personal and professional commitment of the LLI founder and helps spread the word about what individuals and the profession have gained from the LLI. It also provides a blueprint for other interested in leadership development. Having personally observed the learning experiences of one LLI cohort, I know this innovative and professionally credible program has brought benefits for individuals and the broader library community, especially in Canada.As always, I invite contributions to the column on topics broadly addressing themes or issues for library workers, throughout their career lifecycle. Please submit articles for this column to the editor at vicki.williamson@usask.ca

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.004
Scholarly communication0.0180.008
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.019

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Information & Library ReviewSame topicLibrary Science and Information LiteracyFrench-language works237,207