Faculty and Librarian Perceptions of Librarians as Researchers: Results from Semi-Structured Interviews
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
Following on the results of an earlier survey, this study explores the perceptions of librarians as researchers according to academic librarians and faculty using semi-structured interviews. Conducting research is a regular part of the academic librarian role, but one that often faces challenges to its undertaking, and one that is not always recognized. Exploring perceptions of librarian research helps to understand the current state of librarian research, the barriers faced by librarian researchers, and the value of librarian research. Fifteen librarians and seven faculty members were interviewed from eight Canadian universities. The interviews were coded and analysed to identify major themes. Librarian research was found to be sometimes unsupported and therefore difficult to conduct, but valuable to librarians and the discipline of librarianship. Additionally, librarian research was found to improve relations between librarians and faculty, and more broadly, was found to create a more collegial academic climate.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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