MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2634294477 · doi:10.29173/cais946

Information Practices of Young People at a Public Library Makerspace – A Sense-Making Approach

2016· article· fr· W2634294477 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xiaofeng Li, Ross J. Todd

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes du congrès annuel de l ACSI · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiteracy, Media, and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesSociologyLibrary scienceArtComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this research was to understand how young people interact with information at a public library makerspace as well as the opportunities and challenges emerged in their participation. Dervin’s Sense-Making theory and methodology were employed in framing the research questions, data collection and analysis. Findings highlighted the informal learning opportunities of a makerspace, challenges that occurred during the making phase, information and help seeking from iterative trial and error as well as interpersonal resources. Implications for information professionals at public library makerspaces are discussed. Le but de cette recherche était de comprendre comment les jeunes interagissent avec l’information dans une bibliothèque publique équipée d’un atelier partagé, ainsi que les opportunités et les défis ayant émergé au cours de leur participation. La théorie et la méthodologie du sense-making de Dervin a été utilisée dans la formulation des questions de recherche, la collecte et l'analyse des données. Les résultats ont mis en évidence les opportunités d’apprentissage informel de l’atelier partagé; les défis ayant surgi lors de l’utilisation de l’atelier; les recherches d’information et d’aide apparues lors des phases d’essais et erreurs itératifs ainsi que des ressources interpersonnelles. Nous discutons les implications des ateliers partagés en bibliotjèques publiques pour les professionnels de l'information.

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 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)0.016
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.603
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.058
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes du congrès annuel de l ACSISame topicLiteracy, Media, and EducationFrench-language works237,207