MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3141876942 · doi:10.29173/iasl8000

Factors Hindering High School Library Success as Viewed by Librarians, Teachers and Principals in Israel

2021· article· en· W3141876942 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Moshe Yitzhaki, Dania Anzenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueIASL Annual Conference Proceedings · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumSchool libraryProfessional developmentPrincipal (computer security)PopulationPsychologyMedical educationPedagogySociologyLibrary scienceMedicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper presents findings of a wide-scale national study of which one objective was to identify main obstacles hindering high school librarians from successfully carrying out their tasks. Similar detailed questionnaires were mailed to librarians, teachers and principals in a cluster sample of 234 schools (one-third of target population), rendering 137 usable questionnaires (58.5%). The three groups rated quite similarly the obstacles. First and foremost were the scarcities of resources and manpower. Third was inadequate professional training, which was found to include: inadequate training in information technology and in librarianship, scarce skills in management, communication and public relations, as well as lack of training in instruction and lack of familiarity with curriculum and its development. Fourth was the principal's and teaching staff's lack of awareness and recognition of library importance, also acknowledged by principals and teachers. Additional obstacles mentioned were poor physical conditions, discipline problems and the character of the librarian and staff. Recommendations include: promoting understanding of school library and librarian roles by writing Israeli Information Power and by offering courses to principals and teachers on school library's roles, adding personnel positions in school libraries and emphasizing technological topics in library education programs.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.460
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.041
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.253 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIASL Annual Conference ProceedingsSame topicLibrary Science and Information LiteracyFrench-language works237,207