Academic Librarianship: A Crisis or an Opportunity?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
“Academic Librarianship: A Crisis or an Opportunity?" was a one day symposium held at the University of Toronto on November 18, 2011. The symposium provided a forum for stakeholders to consider recent troubling events and developments in the academic library community. The hiring of postdoctoral fellows at McMaster University to replace librarians, the strike by professional librarians at University of Western Ontario in 2011 and threats to the academic freedom of librarians at McGill University have all served as bellwethers and have been rich topics for debate of late. The symposium was intended to provide an opportunity to bring more coherence to the discourse and to consider further initiatives, increased activism, and to begin a process for providing greater leadership around issues relating to academic librarians and academic librarianship. The day was organized around a series of panels. A number of key stakeholders spoke to specific themes: 1) the role of national and provincial labour organizations and local faculty associations; 2) trends and challenges in education and curriculum at library schools; 3) the role of library associations and professional accreditation; and 4) librarians on the front lines. The symposium emerged with a clear call to action: that it is time to become more pro-active in a collective manner, and to use the tremendous interest generated by this event as an opportunity to seek solutions to the challenges facing academic librarianship in Canada. There was overwhelming support for the creation of a virtual forum to continue the discourse and to bring in those who are interested and willing to become engaged but who were unable to participate in the symposium.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.027 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.044 | 0.033 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.019 |
| Research integrity | 0.021 | 0.020 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.006 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".