MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2415451287 · doi:10.11645/10.1.2065

Instructor perceptions of student information literacy:

2016· article· en· W2415451287 on OpenAlex
Patricia Sandercock

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

VenueJournal of Information Literacy · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformation literacyPerceptionCurriculumPsychologyMedical educationHigher educationMathematics educationPedagogyMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study assesses the information literacy (IL) perceptions of instructors at a technical college in the Middle East, the College of the North Atlantic - Qatar. Students at this college are instructed in four areas of study – engineering technology, information technology, business studies and health sciences – which takes place exclusively in English and uses a Canadian curriculum. A web-based survey sent to instructors asked questions in two general areas on their perceptions of student information literacy based on the Society of College, National and University Libraries (SCONUL) definition. Initially, over half of the respondents believed that their students were information literate. However when asked a series of questions about each of the seven IL skills identified by SCONUL, there was a large discrepancy between what skills instructors wished their students achieved, versus what was actually achieved by the end of their programme. Students’ inability to critically evaluate sources of information was seen as the weakest skill by instructors and was considerably lower than the skill level reported by university professors in similar studies. Instructors also conveyed their belief that students lacked strategies when searching for information. When compared to faculty perceptions of students in universities, overall perceptions of IL competency of college students in this study are lower. The study reinforced the need to provide students with tools/strategies to cope with large volumes of information and, when searching, to select appropriate and credible sources of information for both academic and personal uses.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.842
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.190
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.302 · 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