Bibliographic record
Abstract
A survey of stakeholders—superintendents, principals, and board members—explored their perceptions regarding the work of degreed librarians. Results showed that there is an understanding of school librarians’ contributions to student success in learning. When asked what the school librarian does, however, the responses focused on facilities management and read-for-pleasure suggestions. There is ample evidence that the work of the school librarian in the school community increases both standardized test scores and reading scores for an entire school where the librarian is a degreed teacher. Many of the respondents affirm that they are aware of these findings. The decision to retain a school librarian is often framed as a struggle between retaining a classroom teacher and retaining the librarian. Respondents said they understand the benefit of having a school librarian. However, the cognitive bias involved in thinking about the contributions of a school librarian does not secure the position of the school librarian. Prospect theory dictates that the decision to retain needs to be reframed in order to preserve access to school librarians’ contributions to the school community.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.038 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".