Creation of a Research Community in a K-12 School System Using Action Research and Evidence Based Practice
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Objective - The purpose of this study was to apply skills developed from an Action Research Training Model (Gordon) in the design of two action research projects to ensure that students are ethical users of ideas and information. It was deemed necessary to assess prior knowledge and attitudes of students and teachers in order to identify issues to be addressed. Methods - Both projects employed the use of survey instruments, which presented students with scenarios involving aspects of information use, and asked whether or not the actions in the scenarios were examples of ethical use. The high school survey was administered to 381 students in tenth grade English classes. The elementary survey was administered to 87 students in fifth grade. A more comprehensive survey was administered at the high school level. For each student behavior addressed by the survey, there were two questions: one eliciting the teacher’s perception of how often students engaged in that behavior, and the second how often the teacher had to confront a student about the same behavior. Participation was voluntary, and 36 teachers took the survey. Results - Surveys administered at the high school level showed that most students have a good understanding of the ethical use of information regarding clear instances of plagiarism. Students’ understanding was less clear in two major areas: creating a bibliography that accurately reflects the sources used to create the work, and the level of collaboration or assistance that is appropriate in completing a research assignment. The teacher surveys showed some discrepancy between perception of the frequency of certain types of unethical student behavior and how often teachers challenged students on that behavior. The surveys showed that teachers found plagiarism to be the most prevalent behavior, while obtaining copies of exams and buying papers were the least frequently occurring behaviors. At the elementary level, results indicated that understanding how to properly cite sources was a major area of concern. Students were also confused about whom to ask for help during the research process. Instructional intervention was developed and applied. The survey was re-administered with the addition of items that were based on the interventions. Responses showed a marked improvement in understanding by at least 20%. Some responses improved by as much as 60%. Conclusion - The study validated the Action Research Training Model as the first dimension and conceptual framework that informs and guides instructional practices of school library media specialists and teachers in a K-12 school district. After using the model to examine student-teacher knowledge and understanding of ethical use of information (second dimension), there was recognition of the need to clarify the school’s position on the ethical use of information for teachers and students and provide intentional instruction and interventions for students beginning at an earlier grade level. After being made aware of the results, teachers were anxious to work with library media specialists to address issues and to look for opportunities within research units to collaborate.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,344 | 0,242 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,012 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,024 | 0,034 |
| Communication savante | 0,034 | 0,044 |
| Science ouverte | 0,010 | 0,044 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,009 | 0,008 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,002 |
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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».