Exploring the connections between information literacy and writing for international students
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Purpose: This exploratory study sought to investigate how the information literacy process and the writing process may simultaneously be experienced by international students working at both the graduate and undergraduate level. Any connections or intersections that were observed between the two processes were described with an eye towards informing the practice of academic librarians who work with non-native speakers of English. The investigation was framed by a language learning perspective. Methodology: This study used a mixed-method approach. Investigation of the international graduate students who were non-native speakers of English took place through the use of an online survey that consisted of open-ended questions. Investigation of the international undergraduate students who had more limited proficiency in English took place through quantitative means, whereby samples of their produced output on a writing assignment were collected by the researcher and assigned numeric scores indicating both their writing abilities and their information literacy abilities. Findings: Evidence of information literacy and the writing process taking place simultaneously was found for both graduate and undergraduate students who were non-native speakers of English. The graduate student group showed a strong connection between the two processes as they described intersections at critical junctures during the writing of their research essays. They engaged in library practices that can also be viewed as language learning experiences. Undergraduate students who were non-native speakers of English also engaged in both processes simultaneously but no strong correlation was found between the two sets of scores. Originality and Practical Implications: Library literature offers us some information on the information literacy needs of international students but it does not offer any in-depth study that examines how the processes of information literacy and writing may be connected for this particular group of users. In framing a closer look at how these processes appear through a language learning lens, academic librarians may learn how to work more effectively with these students.
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 | 0,004 | 0,025 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,008 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 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 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 ».