iSchool Student Research Journal, Vol.9, Iss.2
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Twitter Facilitates Professional Discussions."Hicks, recently awarded a grant for research into this crucial arena of discourse on the nature and influence of Twitter in the context of the LIS field, shares some compelling questions the research will address.Hicks' contribution discusses the potential of Twitter as a professional tool for increasing inclusion and embracing diversity in the LIS field.Speaking to the profession's values of diversity and intellectual freedom, Hicks identifyies the need for professional organizations to articulate these professional values within the context of emerging forms of online communication and community-building tools, such as Twitter.Hicks' research will contextualize and tease out core debates within the LIS profession regarding Twitter as a platform and how to align professional values with social media engagement.Hicks' work could not be any more on point with key questions in our field and professional community and it is a true pleasure to share a preview.Author Ali N. Sadik-Ogli's evidence summary reviews a pioneering 2018 study focusing on the circulation and collection of zines from the perspective of zine authors themselves.This study addresses the value of inclusive circulation and collection that incorporates a broader perspective of types of records and content, such as born-digital, self-produced and limited-edition physical productions.In the increasingly virtual and fluid world of artistic and culture production, expanding our vision as LIS professionals of how to increase equity of access while ensuring proper attribution and means for supporting creators is a delicate balance worthy of exploration.Author Lisa Lowdermilk's compelling article examines the understudied fiction writing information community.Lowdermilk's synthesis of literature on 1 the topic indicates that networking between writers and sharing archives of fictional writing would enrich the information resources for building community through a shared understanding of the creative process and therefore empower a community of current and future storytellers.Does the concept of genealogical plagiarism interest you?Me too.Author Katherine Richers' article exploring ethical concerns in genealogical records emerges to address a very prescient topic in the context of an era of emerging mechanisms of big data, artificial intelligence, and increasingly digital health records.Richers raises the question of how the LIS field can be proactive in establishing standards for awareness and education on the topic in order to ensure increased access while upholding the integrity of information and the value of sharing records with the intention to make the past accurately visible through the presence of ethical record keeping.Author Michelle Leasure analyzes the value of game-based learning as an innovative pedagogical technique in the academic library setting.Leasure specifically looks at the University of Alabama Libraries' Project Velius and Barlow's indie video game Her Story, which unintentionally created a perfect blueprint for a narrative-driven, completely immersive library instruction tool.In an era where college students are increasingly "digital natives," Leasure's article suggests crucial future directions for libraries to integrate game-based learning into information literacy programming and instruction to increase inclusion and accessibility.Public libraries are increasingly stepping up as community advocates for public health and social service resource centers.Author Heather Elia's article draws attention to the history of public libraries supporting the physical, mental, and social health of their patrons and deep dives into an analysis of the role public libraries currently play in public health and community wellness.Elia's look at the role of public libraries and library professional organizations in addressing the recent opioid crisis adds to the dynamic discourse on such a crucial LIS topic for professional practice.Author Emily Mercer's article focuses on the ethics of recordkeeping and archiving for non-profit organizations (NPOs) whose primary missions revolve around civil and human rights, education, the environment, animal protection, or human services.Mercer argues that if these NPOs seek LIS professionals to develop mission-aligned record keeping and sharing strategies this will improve the current and future impact and effectiveness of these NPOs.Mercer's ability to identify emerging ways for LIS professionals to make a positive impact and effectively expand beyond traditional spheres makes this a must read.Mercer's article takes us home by tying together the themes of this issue: best practices in the increasingly cross-discipline, genre-defying LIS field for cultivating diversity, inclusion, equity of access, and community building, and accounting for emerging and digital forms of media and records in archival work, collection management and in professional communication with a constant look to the future while preserving the past with integrity.The breadth of graduate student and practicing professional research included in this issue demonstrate that SRJ remains committed to escape velocity by publishing innovative research 12
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 | 0.012 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.131 | 0.047 |
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".