Promises, Promises? Or Restoration and Renaissance? Fifteen Brutal Years for School Libraries in British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
British Columbia teachers, through the offices of the BC Teachers’ Federation (BCTF) and often through their own time on the picket lines, have fought for fifteen years to get back the negotiated language that contractually defined the working conditions of teachers, including specialist or non- enrolling teachers such as teacher-librarians. This paper documents the struggles that took the case all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada where, in November of 2016, in just minutes, the teachers’ rights were affirmed and the BC Liberal government’s actions in stripping the negotiated contract language were determined to be illegal. Staffing lost was to be restored. For teacher-librarians, easily the hardest hit teacher group, the decision seemed to offer a breath-taking relief after years of progressively deeper cuts. At the time of writing, believing in the imminent full restoration of staffing to re-define the work of teacher-librarians and in a glorious re-birth of the place of the school library in public education in BC appears to be unrealistic.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".