MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127117689 · doi:10.29173/iasl7639

New Trend of Information Literacy from Leisure Reading Behavior and Experiences of Junior High School Students

2021· article· en· W3127117689 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
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

VenueIASL Annual Conference Proceedings · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Methods and Media Use
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReading (process)The InternetMathematics educationPsychologyReading motivationLiteracyInformation literacyQualitative researchReading comprehensionPedagogyComputer scienceMultimediaWorld Wide WebSociologyLinguisticsSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information literacy education in school libraries is based on abilities of personal reading and learning. The research was used semi-structured interview in qualitative research to understand the reading behavior and experiences of junior high school students who are leisure reading lover. The analysis of qualitative data included both hermeneutic phenomenology and axial coding in grounded theory. According to research obtained, leisure reading behavior of junior high school students have several conclusion. First, The interesting content is the main motive. Second, the purposes of leisure reading behavior may divide into the tool goal and the non- tool goal. Third, internet is acting both important information source and channel. The analysis of leisure reading experiences of junior high school students have several conclusions. First, there are three kinds of reading styles that included comprehensive reading, tool reading and the non- tool reading. Second, participants often use internet communication software to exchange their reading information in internet reading. Third, participants often read datas which they searched or browsed, E-mail, internet literature and book description in the internet. According to research conclusions, this article discussed how to develop information literacy in junior high school students. These ways includes that use internet technologies to improve interaction, have library instruction classes depend on reading purposes, integrate reading information in school effectively and promotes software and hardware equipment in school to reduce the imformation divide. Finally, this article thought new trend of information literacy.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.338
Threshold uncertainty score0.444

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.304 · 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