MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3151835077 · doi:10.29173/iasl8023

School Librarians and Educational Leadership: Productive Pedagogy for the Information Age School

2021· article· en· W3151835077 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ross J. Todd

Bibliographic record

VenueIASL Annual Conference Proceedings · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneral partnershipPedagogyContext (archaeology)UnderpinningEducational leadershipQuality (philosophy)SociologyPsychological interventionProfessional learning communityProfessional developmentPsychologyPolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Against a backdrop of emerging paradigms of educational leadership, this research paper will explore and elaborate some of the fundamental dimensions of quality teaching and learning in information age schools based on the framework of Productive Pedagogy, and in the context of instructional interventions of school librarians in partnership with classroom teachers. This exploration is based on an analysis of extensive data collected during an extended school librarian-classroom teacher collaboration at Gill St Bernards’ School Gladstone, N.J. in 2003-2004. Underpinning productive pedagogy is the belief that high quality teaching and learning should be the focus of professional learning communities and all stakeholders in the school environment. This paper overviews the significant findings of this study, with particular emphasis on an elucidation of the dimensions of productive pedagogy that have enabled students to learn successfully in this collaborative inquiry learning program.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.010
Scholarly communication0.0170.008
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIASL Annual Conference ProceedingsSame topicTeacher Education and Leadership StudiesFrench-language works237,207