MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3140811841 · doi:10.29173/iasl7787

The Shifting sands of School Libraries

2021· article· en· W3140811841 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ross J. Todd

Bibliographic record

VenueIASL Annual Conference Proceedings · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Administration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSchool librarySociologyKey (lock)PedagogyDigital librarySustainabilityPolitical scienceMathematics educationPsychologyLibrary scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reports on selected findings from the Phase 2 New Jersey School Library research study “One Common Goal: Student Learning” completed in 2011 that provides insights into the future of school libraries, and their evolution and transformation in the digital age. The study examines a selected sample of effective school libraries in New Jersey to establish the key inputs (both library and school-wide inputs) that enable these effective school libraries to thrive, contribute richly to the learning agendas of the schools, and to continually be developed and improved in their schools. The findings are selected through the lens school effectiveness and school improvement literature, and identify dimensions of school library practice that have contributed to their sustainability and continuous improvement. Key dimensions include a substantive instructional role of the school librarians, an inquiry-centered pedagogy, a collaborative school culture of distributed leadership, a knowledge-outcomes orientation of the school library, and school librarians as professional development leaders.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.129

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0210.022
Scholarly communication0.0310.023
Open science0.0020.017
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.003

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.258 · 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
GenreOther

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 topicLibrary Science and AdministrationFrench-language works237,207