Investigating the efficacy of embedment: experiments in information literacy integration
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This paper seeks to present the findings of a series of experiments in embedding a librarian at a variety of levels into the undergraduate classroom. This study aimed to determine whether different levels of librarian embedment correlated with improvement in undergraduate students' information literacy (IL) skills. Design/methodology/approach Students from five undergraduate History courses and two undergraduate Women's Studies courses participated in the study. A librarian was embedded in each of the courses, at a variety of levels across courses. All student assignments were graded using a standardized rubric. Students' IL skills were assessed using the research component of the rubric, which measured their ability to locate, retrieve, evaluate, and incorporate sources into their assignments. Students' research and overall scores on their initial problem‐based learning (PBL) assignments and written assignments were compared to their final assignment scores in order to assess improvement over the course of the term. Findings There was significant improvement in students' scores when a librarian was conspicuously and obviously embedded in the academic classroom. Students' scores showed little improvement when the librarian was embedded but not explicitly identified as a specialist in information literacy, and when the researchers attempted to embed information literacy seamlessly in the classroom. Research limitations/implications The research was conducted only in courses in the Humanities. Practical implications This study suggests that students' IL skills improve most when IL is identified in the classroom as a specialized subject taught by a highly trained specialist. The methodology used may be useful for others studying the impact of IL instruction. Originality/value Although embedding has been studied and reported on in the literature in a variety of contexts, the study of different levels of embedding, quantified using the same rubric is unique.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it