The problem of abundance: Text mining approaches to qualitative assessment of asynchronous library instruction

IF 2.5 3区 管理学 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Journal of Academic Librarianship Pub Date : 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1016/j.acalib.2024.102976
Grace Therrell, Joshua Ortiz Baco
{"title":"The problem of abundance: Text mining approaches to qualitative assessment of asynchronous library instruction","authors":"Grace Therrell,&nbsp;Joshua Ortiz Baco","doi":"10.1016/j.acalib.2024.102976","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The expansive adoption of asynchronous library instruction in recent years remains strong even after the conclusion of most COVID-19 emergency remote teaching. This continued growth has also introduced unique methodological challenges for assessment of learning and instruction in the form of vast, unwieldy evaluation data. This study introduces the use of text mining, topic modeling, and exploratory data analysis (EDA) as a novel approach to address the evolving needs of the field of large-scale online library instruction assessment. Librarians employed computational methods on a corpus of 21,506 words from student survey responses representing the instruction experiences of 3720 students to evaluate initial effectiveness of a new instruction approach. The application of a Bayesian topic model revealed latent patterns in self-reported perceptions of course design, mastery of concepts, and gaps in learning. In contrast with the inherent limitations of traditional qualitative analysis, our computational-grounded approach highlights otherwise indiscernible trends and key issues in user experience, instructional content, and online teaching methods. Computational analysis offers the scalability and sustainability necessary to assess asynchronous instruction, and provides clear themes to inform decision-making.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47762,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Academic Librarianship","volume":"50 6","pages":"Article 102976"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Academic Librarianship","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S009913332400137X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The expansive adoption of asynchronous library instruction in recent years remains strong even after the conclusion of most COVID-19 emergency remote teaching. This continued growth has also introduced unique methodological challenges for assessment of learning and instruction in the form of vast, unwieldy evaluation data. This study introduces the use of text mining, topic modeling, and exploratory data analysis (EDA) as a novel approach to address the evolving needs of the field of large-scale online library instruction assessment. Librarians employed computational methods on a corpus of 21,506 words from student survey responses representing the instruction experiences of 3720 students to evaluate initial effectiveness of a new instruction approach. The application of a Bayesian topic model revealed latent patterns in self-reported perceptions of course design, mastery of concepts, and gaps in learning. In contrast with the inherent limitations of traditional qualitative analysis, our computational-grounded approach highlights otherwise indiscernible trends and key issues in user experience, instructional content, and online teaching methods. Computational analysis offers the scalability and sustainability necessary to assess asynchronous instruction, and provides clear themes to inform decision-making.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
丰富性问题:对图书馆异步教学进行定性评估的文本挖掘方法
即使在 COVID-19 紧急远程教学结束之后,近年来异步图书馆教学的广泛采用仍然十分强劲。这种持续增长也为学习和教学评估带来了独特的方法论挑战,其表现形式为庞大而笨重的评估数据。本研究介绍了使用文本挖掘、主题建模和探索性数据分析(EDA)作为一种新方法,以满足大规模在线图书馆教学评估领域不断发展的需求。图书馆员采用计算方法对来自学生调查回复的 21,506 个单词的语料库进行了分析,该语料库代表了 3720 名学生的教学经验,用于评估新教学方法的初步效果。贝叶斯主题模型的应用揭示了自我报告中对课程设计、概念掌握和学习差距的看法的潜在模式。与传统定性分析的固有局限性相比,我们以计算为基础的方法突出了用户体验、教学内容和在线教学方法中原本难以分辨的趋势和关键问题。计算分析为评估异步教学提供了必要的可扩展性和可持续性,并为决策提供了明确的主题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Academic Librarianship
Journal of Academic Librarianship INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
15.40%
发文量
120
审稿时长
29 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Academic Librarianship, an international and refereed journal, publishes articles that focus on problems and issues germane to college and university libraries. JAL provides a forum for authors to present research findings and, where applicable, their practical applications and significance; analyze policies, practices, issues, and trends; speculate about the future of academic librarianship; present analytical bibliographic essays and philosophical treatises. JAL also brings to the attention of its readers information about hundreds of new and recently published books in library and information science, management, scholarly communication, and higher education. JAL, in addition, covers management and discipline-based software and information policy developments.
期刊最新文献
Promoting citizen science through academic libraries in the US: A study on LibGuides Undergraduate research symposium: Vital component in undergraduates' research journey Artificial intelligence implementation strategies for Ghanaian academic libraries: A scoping review Disability policies to guide the provision of facilities, services and resources to students with disabilities: The case of ten Ghanaian academic libraries Visual media assignments: Faculty vs. student experiences and expectations in engineering and business
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1