MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403877479 · doi:10.1353/lib.2024.a941429

Understanding Knowledge Management Education within the North American Higher Education System

2024· article· en· W4403877479 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary trends · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInformation Systems Education and Curriculum Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHigher educationKnowledge managementLibrary sciencePolitical scienceEngineering managementSociologyEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the higher educational systems in the United States and Canada in general and knowledge management (KM) education specifically. The terminal degree for KM is primarily considered to be a master’s degree, and programs vary across disciplines. There are very few master’s degrees in KM; these are found in academic departments or schools of information, business administration, professional studies, and policy and government. Details on these degree programs as well as certificates are presented. Previous degree programs that have been discontinued are discussed. KM courses are also listed that are offered in other library and information science programs throughout the United States and Canada but not part of a KM degree program otherwise. It appears that KM programs and courses are in decline, although this may suggest an evolution rather than a decay of the field.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score0.878

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.225 · 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