MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3148786745 · doi:10.29173/iasl8021

Regional School Library Coordinators’ Visions of Quality School Library Programs and Their Role in Helping to Achieve Them

2021· article· en· W3148786745 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Jeanne Buckley

Bibliographic record

VenueIASL Annual Conference Proceedings · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Administration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisionSchool libraryGovernment (linguistics)Quality (philosophy)SociologyInformation literacyLiteracyPolitical scienceMedical educationPublic relationsSchool districtLibrary sciencePedagogyMedicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A school library coordinator is a position of central leadership for district school boards. The visions of six Canadian school library coordinators about aspects of strong school library programs, and how their role helps achieve them are investigated in this qualitative interview-based study. Results showed that coordinators felt their roles of providing professional development and advocating for school libraries help create school library programs that improve student achievement. For the future, they envisioned a greater role for school libraries in education, with greater collaboration between school library, technology, literacy, and public library circles. A need for greater provincial government support for school libraries was identified. This study explored the values and hopes of school library leaders in Canada, and indicated that a coordinator can do much to support districts’ school libraries and media centers.

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)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.185
Threshold uncertainty score0.369

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0160.008
Scholarly communication0.0140.005
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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