MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1530958788 · doi:10.18438/b85323

Independent Searching During One-Shot Information Literacy Instruction Sessions: Is It an Effective Use of Time?

2012· article· en· W1530958788 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence Based Library and Information Practice · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Canadian institutionsMount Royal University
FundersMount Royal University
KeywordsSession (web analytics)Library instructionInformation literacyPreparednessComputer scienceClass (philosophy)Test (biology)Mathematics educationPsychologyMedical educationWorld Wide WebMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective – To test the assumption that giving students time to research independently during a one-shot information literacy instruction (ILI) session, combined with scaffolding, is an effective pedagogical practice and a good use of class time.
 
 Methods – The study was conducted at a student-focused, four-year undergraduate institution with 8,500 full load equivalent students. Following brief, focused instruction in 10 different ILI sessions, first-, second-, and third-year students in 80-minute one-shot ILI sessions were given time to research independently. The librarian and instructor were present to scaffold the instruction students received. Students were asked to track the research they did during class using a research log and to fill out a short Web survey about their preparedness to do research and the usefulness of the ILI session. 
 
 Results – Students agreed to have 83 research logs and 73 Web surveys included in the study. Students indicated that they felt more prepared to do research for their assignment after the ILI session and rated individual help from the librarian as the most useful aspect of the instruction session. Students did not rate independent time to do research as valuable as anticipated. Examining the research logs indicated that several things are taking place during the ILI session, including that students are demonstrating what was taught in the session in their searches, that their searches are progressing in complexity, and that students are using feedback from previous searches to inform the formulation of search queries. While students appear to be putting independent search time to good use, many students’ articulation of their thesis statement remains poor and searches continue to be fairly simplistic.
 
 Conclusions – This study gives evidence that giving independent research time in ILI sessions, with scaffolding, is an effective use of class time. The study also demonstrates that the majority of students are able to use what is taught during classes and that they are using class time effectively, though searching remains fairly simple. The focus of ILI sessions is on skill development, and future research should be on integrating IL into the curriculum to develop more complex skills and thinking needed in the research process.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.926
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.928
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it