MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3143262525 · doi:10.29173/iasl8177

Censorship in High School Libraries in Israel: An Exploratory Field Study

2021· article· en· W3143262525 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Moshe Yitzhaki

Bibliographic record

VenueIASL Annual Conference Proceedings · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Administration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCensorshipExploratory researchSample (material)Intellectual freedomSociologyPolitical sciencePublic relationsLibrary scienceLawSocial scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The issue of censorship in school libraries has long concerned researchers and practitioners in the field and is well documented in literature. A literature survey reveals dozens of opinion articles as well as research papers reporting empirical field studies, especially in the US, which attempt to determine the extent and objects of censorship and its underlying factors. Although school libraries have existed in Israel for several decades, some of them dating back to the 50's, the issue of censorship has not been studied. The objective of the present exploratory study was to empirically assess the current state of censorship in a sample of high school libraries in the country. The sample comprised 25 high schools, from both the 'religious' and 'non-religious' sectors. The main research tool was a two-parts questionnaire, designed to be filled out during researchers visit to the library. Most librarians reported that some form of control, restriction or censorship was, always or very often, applied to books to be added to the collection, usually by the head librarian. No library had any kind of written document, or even some permanent unwritten statement specifying instructions or policy regarding book acquisition. None of the librarians mentioned any external pressure to censor the existing collection or books to be acquired, and it was dear that the only censorship was an internal one, initiated by the librarians themselves and other members of the school staff. In both sectors there was wide agreement on banning titles which included violence, hard pomography, racism and drugs, but there were considerable differences regarding 'soft' pornography, Holocaust denial, sexual pemissiveness and books degrading the Jewish religion or its values, principles or commands. A comparison of four lists of specific titles against the catalogs showed that the `non-religious' libraries owned three times the percentage from the first list (explicit violence and sex), but only half the percentage from the fourth list ('Judaism), compared to the 'religious' one. Interestingly, the religious group had lower percentages of both the 'rightist' and 'leftist' lists, due to its smaller collections, but relatively more from the 'rightist' list than the 'leftist' one.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.533
Threshold uncertainty score0.812

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.008
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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