Celebrating Undergraduate Students’ Research at York University
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
This article analyses the information literacy (IL) competencies of high-achieving undergraduate students through the lens of undergraduate research celebrations in a North American University. This article focuses on York University’s Undergraduate Research Fair, and shares findings from an analysis of students’ IL award submissions including lower-year (first and second year of university) and upper-year (third and fourth year of university) applicants. Submissions are analysed using a qualitative content analysis approach. The study’s findings point to the positive value of both IL and reference help in building high-achieving undergraduate students’ IL skills. Results indicate important future directions for IL instruction, such as the role of the flipped classroom, and the critical importance of embracing the Association of College and Research Libraries’ (ACRL) Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education to engage undergraduates with high-order IL concepts.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.076 |
| 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