An Analysis of Student Performance at the Intersection of Diversity and Information Literacy
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Objective – When teaching Information Literacy (IL) concepts, instructors often have no knowledge about the background or previous IL exposure of the students they are teaching. This study aims to create a holistic picture of the students at a large Midwestern United States university in a first year introductory course on the design process for solving engineering problems. Methods – Institutional data and course level data were traced and linked to individual students in an introduction to design thinking first year course. This course is at a major high research activity institution in the Midwestern United States. From a total course size of 650, institutional and course level data of 127 students were selected randomly and analyzed. Some data points are self-reported and some data points are performance-based. Results – Underrepresented minorities (URMs) had a higher increase in IL score from assignment 1 to assignment 3 than non-URM students. However, non-URMs performed higher on both the first and the last assignments. Students in concurrent IL designated courses had a higher increase from assignments 1 to 3 than those not in simultaneous IL designated courses. Black and international students had the highest increases from assignments 1 to 3 of any demographic. Regarding IL, the fact that none of the students had been exposed to much IL instruction justified continued collaboration in the course between the instructor of record and the IL specialist. There were significantly negative correlations between the final grade and first-generation status. Legacy students also performed more poorly from assignments 1 to 3. Conclusion – Students are more diverse in a single classroom setting than presumed prior to research; therefore, our instructional practices should be diverse and inclusive, as well. More preparation work and fact finding should be conducted by library faculty and instructors to facilitate the learning of the students, and not just the act of teaching. Librarians could ask for more information about the course demographics and respond accordingly. Librarians should also be properly trained in instructional practices to be better equipped to meet the expectations and challenges of teaching a diverse class.
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 | 0,000 |
| 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 | 0,000 | 0,720 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 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 ».