MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283016571 · doi:10.18438/eblip30090

Assessing the Impact of an Information Literacy Course on Students' Academic Achievement: A Mixed-Methods Study

2022· article· en· W4283016571 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wilma L. Jones, Tara Mastrorilli

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence Based Library and Information Practice · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPropensity score matchingInformation literacyMedical educationPsychologyQualitative propertyMathematics educationCourse evaluationAcademic achievementHigher educationPedagogyMedicineComputer scienceInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective – The aim of this study is to demonstrate the impact of a stand-alone, credit-bearing information literacy course on retention and GPA for students at an open access urban college. Methods – Researchers conducted a mixed-methods study with a two-part focus. The first examined the impact of a credit-bearing course using propensity score matching (PSM) techniques to compare academic outcomes for students who participated in the course versus outcomes for similar students who did not enroll in the course. Multiple regression analyses were conducted to measure impact on GPA and performance in 100-level introductory English general education courses. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine persistence one year after enrolling in the course. The second part utilized a questionnaire to survey students of this targeted group to determine impact of the course on their information-seeking behaviour in subsequent academic courses and for non-academic purposes. Results – The quantitative analyses showed: (a) a higher GPA, though slight, for students who have taken the course over the matched comparison group; (b) an increase in persistence for students who have taken the course over the matched comparison group after one year of taking the course; but (c) lower performance in 100-level introductory English courses by students who have taken the course in contrast to the matched comparison group. Qualitative data provided through the questionnaire revealed positive and substantive reflective statements that support learning outcomes of the course. Conclusion – The findings in this study underscored the importance of a stand-alone, credit-bearing information literacy course for undergraduate students, particularly for first-generation students attending an open access urban institution. The findings also demonstrate the academic library’s contribution to institutional retention efforts in support of students’ academic success.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.428 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations17
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence Based Library and Information PracticeSame topicLibrary Science and Information LiteracyFrench-language works237,207