Information Literacy Course Yields Mixed Effects on Undergraduate Acceptance of the University Library Portal
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Objective – To determine the effects over time of a 3-credit semester-long undergraduate information literacy course on student perception and use of the library web portal.
 
 Design – Mixed methods, including a longitudinal survey and in-person interviews.
 
 Setting – Information literacy course at a comprehensive public research institution in the northeastern United States of America.
 
 Subjects – Undergraduates at all levels enrolled in a 3-credit general elective information literacy course titled “The Internet and Information Access.”
 Methods – A longitudinal survey was conducted by administering a questionnaire to students at three different points in time: prior to instruction, near the end of the course (after receiving instruction on the library portal), and three months after the course ended, during the academic year 2011-2012. The survey was created by borrowing questions from several existing instruments. It was tested and refined through pre-pilot and pilot studies conducted in the 2010-2011 academic year, for which results are reported. Participation was voluntary, though students were incentivized to participate through extra credit for completing the pre- and post-instruction questionnaire, and a monetary reward for completing the follow-up questionnaire. Interviews were conducted with a subset of 14 participants at a fourth point in time.
 
 Main Results – 239 of the 376 (63.6%) students enrolled in the course completed the pre- and post-instruction questionnaire. Fewer than half of those participants (111 or 30% of students enrolled) completed the follow-up questionnaire. Participants were primarily sophomores and juniors (32% each), with approximately one-quarter (26%) freshman, and only 10% seniors. Student majors were concentrated in the social sciences (62%), with fewer students from science and technology (13%), business (13%), and the humanities (9%). The 14 participants interviewed were drawn from both high- and low-use students.
 
 Overall, the course had a positive effect on students’ perception of usefulness (PU) and ease of use (PEOU), as well as usage of the library portal. This included significant positive changes in perceived ease of use and information quality in the short-term (from pre-instruction to post-instruction). The results were mixed for perceived usefulness and system quality. Though there was mixed long-term impact on usage, the course does not appear to have had a long-term effect on PU and PEOU. The interview participants were asked questions to explore why and how they used the library portal, and revealed that both high- and low-use students used the library portal for similar reasons: to find information for research papers or projects, to search the library catalogue for books, and in response to a mandate or encouragement from instructors.
 
 Conclusion – The study supports the theory that an information literacy course could change student perception and use of the library portal in the short-term. Replicating this design in other settings could provide a systematic approach for assessing whether information literacy courses address learning outcomes over time. A longitudinal approach could be useful for comparing proficiency and information behaviors of those who take information literacy courses with those who do not.
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 | 0,000 | 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 | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,768 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 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 ».