MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004595673 · doi:10.1108/rsr-09-2014-0040

Piloting a blended model for sustainable IL programming

2015· article· en· W2004595673 on OpenAlexaff
Jody Nelson, Joan Morrison, Lindsey Whitson

Bibliographic record

VenueReference Services Review · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformation literacyOriginalityComputer scienceCurriculumAsynchronous communicationBlended learningLearning ManagementMedical educationMathematics educationPedagogyPsychologyWorld Wide WebEducational technologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose – This paper aims to describe the MacEwan University Library’s successful pilot of a fully blended information literacy (IL) instruction program for first-year English courses. Development, implementation and assessment of the pilot prior to full implementation are discussed. Design/methodology/approach – The new sustainable blended model for the English Library Instruction Program reduced duplication of content and effort, incorporated online and in-person instruction and promoted self-directed learning opportunities through a new Learning Commons. This model places essential instruction online while maintaining personal relationships for students with the English Librarian and the Library through multiple points of interaction. Face-to-face instruction efforts were concentrated on developing critical thinking skills through a hands-on source evaluation activity and on providing point-of-need support. Librarians worked closely with English faculty to encourage early voluntary adoption of the new model for the Fall 2013 pilot. Findings – The voluntary early-adopter model worked well for garnering and maintaining support from the English department: the authors had 42 per cent of English sessions piloting the new model for Fall 2013, surpassing the initial target of 25 per cent. Students scored well on an assessment of their ability to identify scholarly sources. Librarian preparation time has been greatly reduced. Originality/value – Many academic libraries are looking to asynchronous online tutorials as a more sustainable model for delivering IL instruction. This case study demonstrates that it is possible to move some instruction online while maintaining the personal relationships librarians have forged with students and faculty.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReference Services ReviewSame topicLibrary Science and Information LiteracyFrench-language works237,207