Students' Perceptions of Information Programs in Canada
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Using a web-based survey, this study explored students' perceptions of their master's programs in information studies at six Canadian universities. Findings indicate that students rate most aspects of their programs positively, although few respondents give the highest ratings, indicating that there is substantial room for improvement. When asked directly, How satisfied are you with the education you have received in this program?, the mean rating was 6.6 on a 10-point scale. Among the lowest ratings on quality measures were those for exposure to the latest developments in research and technology and exposure to the most significant developments in the field. We found a decrease in satisfaction as students progress through their programs. Compared to midstream students, a smaller proportion of students in their final term had positive perceptions on almost half of the measures. Findings from the study should be beneficial to information studies educators to inform decisions with respect to curriculum planning and program development.Keywords: Information studies, master's programs, student satisfaction, graduate education, LIS education, web-based surveyIntroductionWhile program assessment initiatives in higher education often focus on student performance and learning outcomes, there is a growing interest in student-oriented measures, such as satisfaction, as a measure of program quality. This focus on student satisfaction has been driven in part by a shift towards the adoption of consumer service models in higher education, which recognize the potential salutary effects of student satisfaction on recruitment and retention (Gruber, Fus, Voss, & Glaser-Zikuda, 2010; Thomas & Galambos, 2004). However, there is also a sound pedagogical rationale, as student satisfaction has been shown to influence academic performance (Bean & Bradley, 1986; Pike, 1991). Much of this research focuses on undergraduate education, but some studies have addressed graduate education including professional programs, e.g., nursing and business. In the LIS field, a limited body of research has studied students' perceptions of their educational programs across institutions, within a single institution, and across different delivery modes; other researchers have studied alumni of LIS programs. In a time of dramatic growth in the size, complexity and diversity of offerings within graduate LIS programs it behoves researchers to study students' perceptions of their programs with the goal of identifying areas where satisfaction is high and areas that need improvements. Greater understanding of students' perceptions can also lead to more effective recruitment efforts, opportunities to improve and enrich the student experience, and increased alumni support through service, donations, and willingness to serve as positive spokespeople for our programs.This paper reports on a study that investigated students' perceptions of their master's programs in six Canadian universities. Study goals were to identify perceptions of specific program attributes and to test for effects of program stage and characteristics of the sample population. Looking forward, we also asked participants in our study to indicate the extent of their support for ten possible future directions for master's programs in information schools. The study involved the development, testing and deployment of three web-based questionnaires within multiple information studies programs in Canada. Use of these evaluation tools is now open to all interested members of the LIS educational community. They are available at http://www.diigubc.ca/projects/lfos/Instrurnents.htmLiterature ReviewAlthough we have a wealth of research on LIS education, few published studies of students' perceptions of their masters programs exist. The extant published research relevant to this study falls into two categories: (1) studies of student satisfaction in higher education generally; and (2) studies of students' and graduates' perceptions of their master's programs in LIS. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,096 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».