Mapping Information Literacy Outcomes and Learning Experiences of Health Sciences Undergraduate Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study assessed whether first year undergraduate students are applying the research skills taught in an information literacy (IL) module in course IT 100 to their work in other classes and for anything unrelated to classes at the Muhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences (MUHAS) in Tanzania. A total of 275 students took part in a printed questionnaire survey which was distributed to all second year undergraduate students at MUHAS, a return rate of 77.2 percent. The study demonstrated that students continue to use the skills gained during the IL course both in other classes and for purposes unrelated to the class. However, there was low use of scholarly databases and the library catalogue for academic and non-academic activities. These findings show a need to address some issues concerning the information literacy module (IT 100.2), such as an increased emphasis on teaching topics related to search strategies, information sources, and evaluation of resources as a practical and useful skill. The study findings further showed that issues related to facilities (internet connectivity and electrical power) will also need to be addressed. This study is based on self-reports by first year undergraduate students, which may not be a precise predictor of their actual health information competencies and their actual use of skills in courses other than IL and for anything unrelated to the class. Further research is needed to validate differences between students' self-reports of their IL competence with their actual competence as measured by a strenuous post-test.
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 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 | 0.011 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.153 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".