MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951274962 · doi:10.29173/iasl7134

Principals’ Perceptions of the Impact of School Library on Student Academic Achievement in Rural Thailand and Factors Driving Their Perceptions

2018· article· en· W2951274962 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nilobon Wimolsittichai

Bibliographic record

VenueIASL Annual Conference Proceedings · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSchool Choice and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionSchool libraryContext (archaeology)Academic achievementPsychologyRural areaPedagogyMathematics educationMedical educationPolitical scienceLibrary scienceGeographyMedicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

School libraries in rural Thailand have faced a serious long-term problem in developing effective libraries, and could not achieve a minimum criteria of school library standard. Key people who influences in supporting and contributing an effective library are school principals because they have authorities in directing and administration the facilitation of change in the schools. Therefore, school principals require to understand the values and impacts of school library on students’ academic achievement. The principals’ perceptions about the impact of school library on students’ academic achievement not only present their awareness of the value of school library on student’s academic achievement, but also reflect their attention on contributing effective libraries. This paper presents the principals’ perceptions of small public primary school in rural Thailand and the factors that drive their perceptions about the impact of school library on students’ academic achievement, which is one part of the study of school libraries and their roles in rural Thailand. These perceptions meaningfully presented the understanding and awareness of school principals about the library values on increasing students’ academic achievement, and revealed the factors influencing those principals’ perceptions. This information was further integrated with rural school libraries’ characteristics and situations to clarify their scenarios and local context, which is important to understand the causes making these libraries struggle to be effective, how to manage with school library issues and develop effective school libraries in rural Thailand.

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 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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.642

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIASL Annual Conference ProceedingsSame topicSchool Choice and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207