MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W6999243821

Collaborative information behavior in learning tasks: a study of engineering students

2013· dissertation· en· W6999243821 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.
aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.

Notice bibliographique

RevueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2013
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineComputer Science
ThématiqueInformation Retrieval and Search Behavior
Établissements canadiensMcGill University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDeliverableTask (project management)Information behaviorCollaborative learningConstruct (python library)Variety (cybernetics)InterimInformation systemCooperative learning
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Collaborative information behaviour is an emerging area in information science that deals with the identification, seeking, searching, and use of information by two or more people to accomplish a task. This dissertation investigates the collaborative information behaviour of senior undergraduate engineering students working on group design-projects at a Canadian university. The dissertation presents a longitudinal research using a constructivist grounded theory methodology in two different but related studies undertaken in successive academic years. The main research method consisted of a web-based survey, bimonthly semi-structured interviews with eight students, and the project deliverables for six different project groups. Project deliverables included weekly reports that described group and project activities, and the projects' interim and final reports. The research results show that learning tasks associated with engineering design projects were information-intensive tasks; information seeking, searching, and use have been ongoing needed activities during the lifespan of these projects. There was found to be a strong relationship among learning task stages and phases, task complexity, and collaborative information behavior. Collaborative information behaviors occurred variably at different project stages and levels, and their nature were task-dependent. Students' perception of task complexity triggered collaborative seeking and use of a variety of information sources, with preferences for information from perceived subject-experts. It was also found, in many situations, when students' perceived task complexity increased, their information behavior tended to be more collaborative.The study highlighted the need for groups to construct and share a collaborative situation awareness in order to maintain and regulate their activities in information seeking and use; this shared awareness was enabled by students' interactions in their group meetings or their use of collaborative software tools for information sharing. Learners sought and created meaning from information through collaborative information synthesis over long intervals by prioritizing, judging relevance, and building connections of information. The research investigated collaborative information behavior in learning tasks through a detailed analysis of findings that resulted in a holistic conceptual framework illustrating the dynamic interplay of the components of task-based collaborative information behavior in learning tasks. Collaborative information behavior was conceptualized with details in its three distinct but interrelated dimensions: (1) learner's knowledge, (2) learners' activities and interactions, and (3) information objects; the representation of interdependence of these three dimensions confirmed the complexity of collaborative information behavior as a human behavior that cannot be investigated by focusing on a single dimension and eliminating the other ones.The dissertation presents original research that extends our conceptual understanding of students' collaborative information behavior in learning tasks and also provides more insights into how collaborative information behaviors are dynamically shaped by the characteristics of the learning task.

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.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Autre devis · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,785
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,006
Science ouverte0,0020,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,010
Tête enseignante GPT0,263
Écart entre enseignants0,253 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle