MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416271984 · doi:10.22146/mi.v34i2.22305

Evaluasi Pemenuhan Standar Nasional Perpustakaan terhadap Perpustakaan Peserta Bimbingan Teknis Pengembangan Perpustakaan Sekolah/Madrasah

2025· article· id· W4416271984 on OpenAlexaff
Dian Widanarta, Anisa Kristiani Tarigan

Bibliographic record

VenueMedia Informasi · 2025
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Methods and Media Use
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
Keywordsnot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengevaluasi tingkat pemenuhan Standar Nasional Perpustakaan (SNP 004:2024) oleh peserta Bimbingan Teknis Pengembangan Perpustakaan Sekolah/Madrasah yang diselenggarakan oleh Perpustakaan Nasional Republik Indonesia pada tahun 2024 di 19 provinsi. Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan kuantitatif deskriptif dengan jenis penelitian evaluatif. Populasi dalam penelitian ini adalah seluruh peserta bimbingan teknis sebanyak 1.804 orang, yang sekaligus dijadikan sampel (total sampling). Data dikumpulkan melalui instrumen akreditasi perpustakaan berbasis enam komponen utama yaitu: koleksi, sarana dan prasarana, layanan, tenaga perpustakaan, penyelenggaraan dan pengelolaan, dan tiga komponen penguat yaitu: inovasi dan kreativitas, Tingkat Kegemaran Membaca (TGM), dan Indeks Pembangunan Literasi Masyarakat (IPLM). Instrumen disebarkan secara daring menggunakan Google Form dan dianalisis secara deskriptif kuantitatif untuk mengetahui skor rata-rata dan tingkat pemenuhan SNP secara keseluruhan maupun per komponen. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa hanya 315 responden (17,46%) yang memperoleh skor di atas 60 dan dapat dikategorikan telah memenuhi SNP 004:2024, sementara 1.489 responden (82,54%) masih perlu melakukan peningkatan dalam pengelolaan perpustakaan. Komponen dengan nilai rata-rata tertinggi adalah penyelenggaraan perpustakaan (53,51), sedangkan komponen dengan nilai terendah adalah inovasi dan kreativitas (36,05). Temuan ini menunjukkan bahwa aspek administratif dan kelembagaan telah lebih banyak dipenuhi dibandingkan dengan aspek pengembangan program inovatif. Hasil penelitian ini dapat menjadi dasar perencanaan kebijakan pembinaan dan peningkatan kapasitas perpustakaan sekolah/madrasah di masa mendatang.

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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.834
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.286 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedia InformasiSame topicEducational Methods and Media UseFrench-language works237,207