Using Photo-Elicitation with Native American Students to Explore Perceptions of the Physical Library
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective – This research project explored Native American students’ perceptions of the Edmon Low Library at Oklahoma State University (OSU). The study sought to understand how Native American students perceived the role of the academic library in their lives, and which elements of the library students depicted and described as holding meaning for them. Methods – Photo-elicitation, a form of visual research and a participatory research method, was the primary method chosen to explore students’ perceptions of the library. To qualify for this study, students self-identified as Native American and as frequent library users. They also had completed three or more semesters of study at OSU. Five students followed a photo prompt for taking at least fifteen pictures of the library, then participated in two separate interviews with the primary researcher. Participants also completed a demographic/questionnaire form, answered semi-structured questions, and ranked the photos they took. Results – This study produced several emergent findings. First, students expressed uncertainty about the library’s books. Second, functional library tools such as express printers and library signage played a valuable role for facilitating student work. Third, the method of photo-elicitation was enjoyable for students and served as library discovery. Fourth, Native American resources and exhibits in the library had varied salience for students. Conclusion – Limited research focuses on Native American students in academic libraries, particularly on how students use and experience the library. Exploring how individual students who identify as Native American perceive the university library enhanced our understanding of how libraries in Predominantly White Institutions (PWIs) can best serve and support students. This study provided insight into the method of photo-elicitation interviews. This research also provided practical benefits for student participants through increased library knowledge.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".