MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W289424335

Making a Difference: Leadership and Academic Libraries/On Sibyl's Shoulders: Seeking Soul in Library Leadership

2008· article· en· W289424335 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Lana Kamennof-Sine

Bibliographic record

VenuePartnership The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoulSociologyManagementLibrary sciencePsychologyEpistemologyPhilosophyComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hernon, Peter and Nancy Rossiter, eds. Making a Difference: Leadership and Academic Libraries. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited, 2007. 300 pp. 50.00 USD. ISBN-10: 1-59158-291-1. ISBN-13: 978-1-59158-291-5. ∞ Brockmeyer, Donna. On Sibyl's Shoulders: Seeking Soul in Library Leadership. Toronto:Scarecrow Press, 2005. 171 pp. 37.00 USD. ISBN-10: 0-8108-5120-2. ISBN-13: 978-0-81085-120-7. ∞ are more books, articles, and dissertations on than on any other topic in the field of management. The sheer volume of research and writing about models indicates that is neither easily defined, nor a topic where there is much consensus. Furthermore, new models and new insights continue emerge. There is also little agreement about what makes a leader effective. (Hernon and Rossiter 111) That said, do Brockmeyer's On Sibyl's Shoulders: Seeking Soul in Library Leadership and Hernon and Rossiter's Making a difference: Leadership and Academic Libraries actually make a difference? It is immediately apparent that these books represent two very different approaches capturing the essence of the concept of Hernon and Rossiter's work is formally and clearly structured for ease of access information while Brockmeyer's work is a more organic treatise. There would appear be a trend of tomes being written for specific professions (Boyle, 2007; Moyles, 2006; Oakley, 2002, etc.).They all provide a brief review of concepts and traits, and identify the need for and suggest ways of nurturing its development. In this very broad sense, both Brockmeyer's and Hernon and Rossiter's works follow precedent. While both are thoughtfully written and thought provoking, this reviewer did find a significant difference in placement of emphasis, or focus, between these two works. As stated in Hernon and Rossiter's preface, their book is intended for students, participants in and instructors of institutes, library managers, and, for that matter, any one interested in advancing the quality of within LIS and in the term managerial leadership. (xiv) There is certainly material be found within this text that will appeal each of these groups, although current library managers, and all those who aspire library leadership, will garner the greatest benefit. Brockmeyer, on the other hand, intends to both describe and enrich our understanding of ways create meaning and deep satisfaction in the workplace for all, regardless of role or organizational position. (3) The first quarter of Hernon and Rossiter's book focuses on defining leadership, identifying the need for it in libraries, and providing a succinct summary of the variety of theories of that abound, in both general management and academic library-specific, publications. It is both thorough and current, covering concepts of cultural and emotional intelligence and servant Material found here will undoubtedly find its way into papers written for class and conference. On Sibyl's Shoulders introduces its use of soul as a metaphor for in libraries on page three and then needs spend time exploring and explaining it in terms of history and contextual use. There is a terse examination of ancient, contemporary, critical, feminist and alternative leadership (p. 17) followed by a discussion of aspects of that reveals the sociological training of the author. Chapter 8 of Hernon and Rossiter's book alone, with its candid reflections of eight American academic library leaders, would be worth the price of purchase. Each of these individuals responded the following questions: * How do you stay attuned the pulse of the institution? * How do you keep the library aligned with that pulse? * How do you keep the librarians focused on matters important both the organization and the institution? …

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0090.010
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.007

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 head0.356
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.055 · 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
GenreCommentary

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
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePartnership The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and ResearchSame topicLibrary Science and Information LiteracyFrench-language works237,207