Personal Growth, Habits and Understanding: Pleasure Reading Among First-Year University Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<b>Objectives</b> – This study examines the reading habits and experiences of first-year undergraduate students at Dalhousie University and the University of King’s College in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.<br><b>Methods</b> – First-year undergraduate university students (aged 18 to 20) were recruited to take part in focus group discussions and responses were analysed to examine the following topics: (1) the role of reading in their lives, both academic and personal; (2) the development of reading habits from childhood; (3) reading engagement strategies; and (4) selection strategies.<br><b>Results</b> – This study suggests that reading for pleasure is a well-established habit amongst many first-year undergraduate students. First-year undergraduates primarily read for pleasure in order to relax but also recognize that pleasure reading can play a positive role in their academic performance, enhancing their range of background knowledge as well as their active vocabulary.<br><b>Conclusions</b> – The conclusions of this research provide recommendations for librarians and university administration to engage students and increase rates of retention in postsecondary institutions. In particular, recommendations related to the importance of pleasure reading collections, campus reading programs, book clubs, readers’ advisory services and quiet and comfortable reading areas in academic libraries are provided.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".