Advancing to the academics: How did first-year Chinese undergraduates evaluate academic literature?

IF 3.7 2区 教育学 Q1 Social Sciences
Pengfei Zhao, Xian Liao
{"title":"Advancing to the academics: How did first-year Chinese undergraduates evaluate academic literature?","authors":"Pengfei Zhao,&nbsp;Xian Liao","doi":"10.1016/j.tsc.2024.101600","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In the context of tertiary education, the ability to evaluate sources is of paramount importance for students’ academic reading and writing development, particularly for first-year university students who are still in the transitional stage. Some researchers have argued that Chinese students may lack critical thinking skills, including evaluation skills. However, little attention has been given to this higher-order thinking skill when it comes to first-year Chinese university students reading academic literature. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the criteria used by 117 Chinese first-year undergraduates when evaluating academic literature and how these criteria influence their evaluation accuracy. The results revealed that students generally demonstrated the ability to distinguish reliable from unreliable academic documents by utilizing a range of evaluation criteria. Among the identified criteria, <em>Topicality</em> and <em>Publication Information</em> were prominently employed by students. Furthermore, these criteria accounted for approximately 21 % of the variance in evaluation accuracy, with <em>Publication Information, Reference</em>, and <em>Data</em> significantly predicting evaluation performance. The study also discussed the pedagogical implications of teaching academic literacy to first-year undergraduates.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47729,"journal":{"name":"Thinking Skills and Creativity","volume":"53 ","pages":"Article 101600"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Thinking Skills and Creativity","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187118712400138X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the context of tertiary education, the ability to evaluate sources is of paramount importance for students’ academic reading and writing development, particularly for first-year university students who are still in the transitional stage. Some researchers have argued that Chinese students may lack critical thinking skills, including evaluation skills. However, little attention has been given to this higher-order thinking skill when it comes to first-year Chinese university students reading academic literature. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the criteria used by 117 Chinese first-year undergraduates when evaluating academic literature and how these criteria influence their evaluation accuracy. The results revealed that students generally demonstrated the ability to distinguish reliable from unreliable academic documents by utilizing a range of evaluation criteria. Among the identified criteria, Topicality and Publication Information were prominently employed by students. Furthermore, these criteria accounted for approximately 21 % of the variance in evaluation accuracy, with Publication Information, Reference, and Data significantly predicting evaluation performance. The study also discussed the pedagogical implications of teaching academic literacy to first-year undergraduates.

学术进阶:中国本科一年级学生如何评价学术文献?
在高等教育背景下,评价资料来源的能力对于学生的学术阅读和写作发展至关重要,尤其是对于仍处于过渡阶段的大学一年级学生而言。一些研究者认为,中国学生可能缺乏批判性思维能力,包括评价能力。然而,在中国大学一年级学生的学术文献阅读中,很少有人关注这种高阶思维能力。因此,本研究旨在调查 117 名中国一年级本科生在评价学术文献时所使用的标准,以及这些标准如何影响他们的评价准确性。研究结果表明,学生们普遍能够利用一系列评价标准来区分可靠和不可靠的学术文献。在已确定的标准中,主题性和出版信息被学生广泛使用。此外,这些标准约占评价准确性差异的 21%,其中出版信息、参考文献和数据对评价成绩有显著的预测作用。该研究还讨论了向一年级本科生教授学术素养的教学意义。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Thinking Skills and Creativity
Thinking Skills and Creativity EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
16.20%
发文量
172
审稿时长
76 days
期刊介绍: Thinking Skills and Creativity is a new journal providing a peer-reviewed forum for communication and debate for the community of researchers interested in teaching for thinking and creativity. Papers may represent a variety of theoretical perspectives and methodological approaches and may relate to any age level in a diversity of settings: formal and informal, education and work-based.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信