MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313829869 · doi:10.5860/crl.84.1.7

The Effect of Information Literacy Training on Graduate Students’ Ability to Use Library Resources

2023· article· en· W4313829869 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCollege & Research Libraries · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformation literacyWindsorMedical educationThe InternetSet (abstract data type)Significant differenceTraining (meteorology)PsychologyComputer scienceLiteracyMathematics educationWorld Wide WebMedicinePedagogyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study assessed the influence of information literacy training on graduate students’ self-rated ability to search using academic databases and the internet to find information, as well as their objective information literacy skills through a survey in 2017 at the University of Windsor. After controlling for a comprehensive set of covariates, there was not a statistically significant difference in self-rated searching ability between students with training and those without any training. However, the trained students’ average objective assessment scores in the five dimensions of information literacy were significantly higher than those of students without any training at the significant level α=0.05.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.621
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.054
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.298 · 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