Learning outcomes of information literacy instruction at business schools
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
Abstract This paper reports results from an exploratory study investigating the factors affecting student learning outcomes of information literacy instruction (ILI) given at business schools. Specifically, the potential influence of student demographics, learning environment factors, and information literacy program components on behavioral, psychological, and benefit outcomes were examined. In total, 79 interviews with library administrators, librarians, teaching faculty, and students were conducted at three business schools with varying ILI emphases and characteristics. During these interviews, participants discussed students' ILI experiences and the outcomes arising from those experiences. Data collection also involved application of a standardized information literacy testing instrument that measures student information literacy competency. Analysis yielded the generation of a new holistic theoretical model based on information literacy and educational assessment theories. The model identifies potential salient factors of the learning environment, information literacy program components, and student demographics that may affect ILI student learning outcomes. Recommendations for practice and implications for future research are also made.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.042 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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