MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3153954736 · doi:10.17615/v3hc-km12

From Concept to Practice: Themes of Diversity Within the Strategic Planning of Academic Libraries

2020· article· en· W3153954736 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Margaret McGuire

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Massachusetts AmherstIowa State UniversityMcGill UniversityUniversity of LouisvilleMcMaster UniversityLouisiana State UniversityJohns Hopkins UniversityMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyUniversity of Miami LibrariesKent State UniversityUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUniversité LavalUniversity of Miami
KeywordsDiversity (politics)Strategic planningSociologyEngineering ethicsKnowledge managementPublic relationsPolitical scienceComputer scienceBusinessEngineeringAnthropologyMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined themes of diversity within the Strategic Planning documents of academic libraries listed as members of the Association of College and Research Libraries. A quantitative and qualitative analysis was conducting using a coding scheme designed for identifying diversity themes within academic library diversity statements as well as additional themes relating to actions described as furthering diversity. Results indicate that while many of the academic libraries include diversity as a value and a strategic goal, few are interpreting and contextualizing diversity within the strategic plan, indicating an issue between an ascribed ideal versus policy put into practice

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)0.041
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.049
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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.215

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0410.049
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0100.037
Scholarly communication0.0150.015
Open science0.0030.016
Research integrity0.0020.005
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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLibrary Science and Information LiteracyFrench-language works237,207