MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2751360769 · doi:10.29173/iasl7823

Building a Vibrant Future for School Librarians through Online Conversations for Professional Development

2021· article· en· W2751360769 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueIASL Annual Conference Proceedings · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfessional developmentPedagogySociologyPublic relationsMedical educationPolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Technology and social media platforms are driving an unprecedented reorganization of the learning environment in and beyond schools around the world. Technology provides us leadership challenges, and at the same time offers opportunities for communication and learning through technology channels to support professional development. School librarians and teacher librarians are often working as the sole information practitioner in their school, and need to stay in touch with others beyond their own school to develop their personal professional capacity to lead within their school. The Australian Teacher Librarian Network aims to make a difference, and supports school library staff in Australia and around the world to build professional networks and personal learning connections, offering an open and free exchange of ideas, strategies and resources to build collegiality. This ongoing professional conversation through online and social media channels is an important way to connect, communicate and collaborate in building a vibrant future for school librarians.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.108

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0290.015
Scholarly communication0.0330.043
Open science0.0020.042
Research integrity0.0060.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.013

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIASL Annual Conference ProceedingsSame topicLibrary Science and Information LiteracyFrench-language works237,207