MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393344721 · doi:10.29173/istl2816

Critical Pedagogies and Critical Information Literacy in STEM librarianship: A Literature Review

2024· review· en· W4393344721 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIssues in Science and Technology Librarianship · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Administration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformation literacyDisciplineLibrary instructionCritical literacySociologyCritical thinkingWork (physics)Critical theoryPedagogySocial justiceEngineering ethicsLiteracyLibrary scienceComputer sciencePolitical scienceSocial scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In contrast to the traditional library instruction aim of finding and evaluating information, critical library pedagogies aim to teach students to analyze and challenge the power structures that determine what kind of information is deemed valuable. STEM librarians have been slower to take up these approaches than our colleagues with other disciplinary focuses, yet I argue that critical teaching is one of the most important ways that we can support social justice goals in our work. In this paper, I review the existing literature on critical pedagogies in STEM librarianship and suggest ways for us to develop our practice in this area.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.878
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.011
Science and technology studies0.0000.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.024
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.372 · 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