MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3128309914 · doi:10.29173/iasl7577

Effects on Reader Services of Applying Blogs in High School Libraries in Taiwan

2021· article· en· W3128309914 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sheng-Shyong Jheng, Yu-Hsiu Lai

Bibliographic record

VenueIASL Annual Conference Proceedings · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWeb and Library Services
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReading (process)School libraryWorld Wide WebComputer scienceKey (lock)Channel (broadcasting)Library instructionLibrary scienceMultimediaPolitical scienceInformation literacyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study is to explore high school library blogs in terms of its construction, purposes, contents and influences to reader services in Taiwan. Ten highly- represented high school library blogs were chosen and compared by using content analysis and interview methods. The findings suggested that the majority of the blog content in high school libraries focus on promoting reading activities. Second, the purposes of constructing library blog are to announce library-related news, provide students a reading environment, and to coordinate with teachers’ instructional activities. Third, the most distinctive influence of library blog in terms of reader services is the extension of communication channel and simplification of announcement procedure. Fourth, more than half of the high school library blogs have reached their expected goals on reader services. Finally, most of the high school libraries are intended to continuingly maintain their blogs toward multiple services direction. Based on above findings, the study has reached the conclusion that the construction of blog is indeed helpful to enhance library reader services. However, the support of school authorities is the key factor on whether the application of blog can be successful to high school libraries.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIASL Annual Conference ProceedingsSame topicWeb and Library ServicesFrench-language works237,207