Advancing the Reference Narrative: Assessing Student Learning in Research Consultations
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Objective – As reference services continue to evolve, libraries must make evidence based decisions about their services. This study seeks to determine the value of reference services in relation to student learning acquired during research consultations, by soliciting students’ and librarians’ perceptions of consultation success and examining the degree of alignment between them. Methods – The alignment of students’ learning outcomes (reported skills and knowledge acquired) with librarians’ expectations for student learning during consultations was assessed. An online questionnaire was conducted to gather responses from students who had sought consultation services; 20 students participated. In-person interviews took place with eight librarians who had provided these consultations. The online questionnaire for students included questions about students’ assessments of their self-identified learning goals through consultation with a librarian and their success at applying the knowledge and skills gained. Librarian interviews elicited responses about students’ prior research experience, librarians’ objectives for student learning, librarians’ perceptions of student learning outcomes, and perceived consultation success. The responses of both the students and the librarians were coded, matched, and compared. Results – Students and librarians both considered the consultation process to be successful in advancing learning objectives and research skills. All students reported that the consultations met their expectations, and most reported that the skills acquired were applicable to their projects and significantly improved the quality of their work. Librarians expressed confidence that students had gained competency in the following skill sets: finding sources, search strategy development, topic exploration, specific tool use, and library organization and access. A high degree of alignment was observed in the identification by both students and librarians of “finding sources” as the skill set most in need of enhancement or assistance, while some disparity was noted in the ranking of “search strategy development,” which librarians ranked second and students ranked last. Conclusion – The data demonstrate that both students and librarians perceived individual research consultations as an effective means to meet student learning expectations. Study findings suggest that as reference models continue to change and reference desk usage declines, research consultations remain a valuable element in a library’s service model and an efficient use of human resources.
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 | 0,018 | 0,089 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,007 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
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 ».