MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312224908 · doi:10.17723/2327-9702-85.2.678

Who Is This Godot? The Academy of Certified Archivists and Graduate Archival Education

2022· article· en· W4312224908 on OpenAlexaff
Ashley Todd‐Diaz, Alex H. Poole

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Archivist · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDigital and Traditional Archives Management
Canadian institutionsLibrary and Archives Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCertificationAccreditationProfessionalizationVocational educationCertification and AccreditationMedical educationAmbivalenceSociologyProfessional certification (computer technology)Value (mathematics)Graduate educationPolitical sciencePedagogyPsychologyMedicineLawSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Since the 1936 founding of the Society of American Archivists, the archival field has struggled with the challenges inhering in professionalization, namely the merits or demerits of institutional or individual accreditation or certification. In 1989, SAA helped establish the Academy of Certified Archivists (ACA), which confers individual certification by written examination. In 1993, ACA modified its bylaws to require graduate education to be eligible for the exam. But, although a relationship clearly exists between certification and education, scholars have not explored, much less profited from, the insights of archival educators. This qualitative case study uses semistructured interviews with thirty-three tenure-track or tenured faculty program directors from graduate archival programs across North America to understand how educators perceive and address certification. Findings reveal that educators are ambivalent about certification, its relationship to graduate education, and its vocational value. The authors discuss the implications of these findings and offer suggestions for research and 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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0160.024
Scholarly communication0.0110.007
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American ArchivistSame topicDigital and Traditional Archives ManagementFrench-language works237,207