MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1569733116

Habilidades informacionais abordadas em instrumentos de avaliação de CI

2014· article· pt· W1569733116 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldComputer Science
TopicInformation Science and Libraries
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesInformation literacyLibrary sciencePolitical scienceSociologyPedagogyPsychologyPhilosophyComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A avaliacao da competencia informacional e um tema candente e pouco explorado no Brasil. Em âmbito internacional, existem instrumentos validados que sao utilizados em larga escala para verificar a competencia em informacao de individuos em diferentes contextos. Os resultados da aplicacao deste instrumentos servem como um diagnostico para o planejamento e aplicacao de atividades de formacao da competencia informacional pelos bibliotecarios e professores. Realizou-se uma analise de quatro instrumentos internacionais: o Beile Test of Information Literacy for Education – B-TILED da University of Central Florida, o instrumento do Working Group on Library Instruction of the Subcommittee on Libraries of the Conference of Rectors and Principals of Quebec Universities – CREPUQ do Canada, o Information Competency Proficiency Exam do projeto Bay Area Community Colleges Information Competency Assessment Project e o instrumento da universidade St. Olaf College The First Year Information Literacy in the Liberal Arts Assessment (FYILLAA) Project. Neste artigo serao apresentados os resultados referentes as habilidades informacionais abordadas nestes instrumentos. Verificou-se que os instrumentos analisados focaram as habilidades relativas a identificacao dos termos da necessidade informacional, a elaboracao e construcao de estrategias de buscas disponiveis no parâmetro dois da Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL); diferenciacao de fontes (parâmetro um); avaliacao e selecao das fontes informacionais e selecao das informacoes do tema pesquisado (parâmetro tres); e, por fim, as habilidades ligadas a questao do plagio (parâmetro cinco). O parâmetro quatro que esta voltado a comunicacao de informacoes nao foi abordado pelos instrumentos. As questoes de multipla-escolha foram as mais recorrentes em todos os instrumentos analisados. Concluiu-se que ha uma preocupacao dos responsaveis pela elaboracao dos instrumentos analisados com aspectos mais tradicionais de formacao de usuarios e com os aspectos tecnicos da competencia em informacao em detrimento dos aspectos eticos e esteticos.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.703
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInformation Science and LibrariesFrench-language works237,207