Collecting Data About the Impact of School Libraries on Education, at International Level, in Developing, Emerging and Developed Countries
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes “work in progress”. It outlines attempts being made by the IASL Research SIG, the ENSIL Foundation and the Royal Tropical Institute in Amsterdam to collect consistent data about school libraries in developing, emerging and developed countries, using an international definition of what a school library actually is. During a meeting of the IASL Research SIG on 24 January 2012 it was agreed that a set of simple questions (approx. 10 questions for each group) which could be answered by pupils, teachers, school librarians and school leaders in different countries throughout the world should be developed . Sets of questions are now being reviewed by a selected group of school library practitioners and academics and by a small sub-committee of the Research SIG. Using the agreed sets of questions, preliminary data will then be collected by a number (school) library associations or other affiliated organizations in different parts of the world. Initial progress and results will be presented. It is to be hoped that some (initial) useful data and comparisons will demonstrate the international scope and impact of school libraries to all stakeholders, at international level.
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.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it