With the continuous development of information technology, information literacy education is becoming more and more important for university students. However, information literacy education in Chinese universities is still in the development stage and the cultivation effect needs to be improved. Therefore, this study takes the teaching of Information Retrieval as an example, based on constructivist learning theory and social exchange theory, reveals the influential factors related to the cultivation effect and explores the causal rela-tionship between each variable and the cultivation effect through a qualitative comparative analysis research method with a configura-tion perspective. This study finds that university students in information literacy education can be classified into four categories: context-driven, class-guidance, meaning-realised and motivation satisfaction. For these four types of university students, this study proposes corresponding countermeasures for information literacy cultivation in order to enhance the effectiveness of cultivation.
Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China. Notice of the Higher Education Department of the Ministry of Education on printing and distributing the main points of work in 2022, http://www.moe.gov.cn/s78/A08/tongzhi/202203/t20220310_606097.html (2022, accessed 10 July 2022).
3.
HavelkaS. Mobile information literacy: supporting students’ research and information needs in a mobile world. Intern Ref Serv Quart2013; 18: 189–209.
4.
HanbidgeASSandersonNTinT. Using mobile technology to enhance undergraduate student digital information literacy skills: a Canadian case study. IAFOR J Educ Technol Educ Spec Ed2015; 3: 108–121.
5.
LiuJJ. The research on application of target model in the information literacy education in university. New Cent Libr2020; 1: 49–52.
6.
WuNFHeQF. Current status, problems and countermeasures on the ‘Information Literacy Education’ courses in the colleges and universities in Shanghai. Libr J2018; 66: 39–46.
7.
HicksALloydA. Deconstructing information literacy discourse: peeling back the layers in higher education. J Libr Inform Sci2021; 53: 559–571.
8.
ZinnSStilwellCHoskinsR. Information literacy education in the South African classroom: reflections from teachers’ journals in the Western Cape province. Libri2016; 66: 31–44.
9.
ChenJQLuoJLZhongJ. When institutional contexts and psychological cognition can stimulate entrepreneurship activity? A study based on QCA approach. Sci Sci Manag S T2019; 40: 114–131.
10.
SamsonS. Information literacy learning outcomes and student success. J Acad Libr2010; 36: 58–84.
11.
GuoYRGohDH. Evaluation of affective embodied agents in an information literacy game. Comput Educ2016; 103: 59–75.
12.
SharunS. Practicing information literacy: practicum students negotiating information practice in workplace settings. J Acad Libr2021; 47: 1–7.
13.
HuangXBPengJF. Research on the evaluation of undergraduate information literacy under the new environment. Res Libr Sci2019; 19: 12–20.
14.
BennettS. Campus cultures fostering information literacy. Libr Acad2007; 7: 147–167.
15.
YuHYGuanHHLiSP. How can information technology education in local universities promote the information literacy of normal school students? Analysis of multiple mediating effects based on value cognition, support resources and cultural atmosphere. Educ Econ2020; 36(4): 90–96.
16.
BuryS. Learning from faculty voices on information literacy: opportunities and challenges for undergraduate information literacy education. Inform Sci Libr Sci2016; 4: 237–252.
17.
AndrettaS. Evaluating information literacy educators’ practices before and after the course facilitating information literacy education: from tutor to learner-centered. Health Inform Libr J2011; 28: 171–178.
18.
WuSJ. Application of inquiry teaching model in college information literacy classroom: reconstructing the value of traditional classroom teaching in the context of MOOCS. Libr Work Coll Univ2019; 39: 46–50, 92.
19.
WanWJ. Analysis on models and strategies of information literacy education MOOC in university libraries. J Modern Inform2017; 37: 118–123.
20.
PiagetJ. Cognitive development in children: Piaget development and learning. J Res Sci Teach1964; 2: 176–186.
21.
KathrynM. Preparing library students to be managers of social innovation hubs: a framework for course design. Libr Quart2018; 8: 208–224.
22.
WertschJV. Culture, communication, and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1985, pp. 21–34.
23.
AhmetGCetinDKubraG. A new approach for learning: interactive direct teaching based constructivist learning (IDTBCL). Proced Soc Behav Sci2015; 197: 2384–2389.
24.
BreitR. Case-based education: a strategy for contextualizing journalism curriculum in East Africa. Journalism2020; 21: 1985–2005.
25.
ZhouQRenSHCaiYC. The innovative practice of constructivism-based academic training camp for information literacy education. Libr J2021; 40(11): 125–132.
26.
HomansGC. Social behavior as exchange. Am J Sociol1958; 63: 597–603.
27.
ShengDF. Research on users’ motivations of social sharing. Libr Inform2020; 4: 36–44.
28.
SoltaniABoostaniDGolestaniS. Exploring the strategies of faculty-student interactions: a grounded theory study in Iranian academic context. Learn Cult Soc Interact2021; 26: 1–13.
29.
CiaránD. Exploring motivations for intercultural contact among host country university students: an Irish case study. Int J Intercult Relat2013; 37: 567–578.
30.
WangMChenYYangZG. A study on the motivation factors influencing the teaching effect of flipped classroom in information retrieval. J Acad Libr2019; 37: 78–86.
31.
WangMChenYYangZG. A study on the influence mechanism of undergraduates’ learning behavior in flipped classroom: taking the course of Information Retrieval as an example. Libr Inform Serv2019; 63: 119–128.
32.
ShiLM. On the intrinsic motivation changes of basic disciplines’ top-notch students in first-class universities and the affecting factor. J Hunan Univ Sci Technol Soc Sci Ed2017; 20: 174–179.
33.
HeLF. Flipped classroom teaching model and its application in the information literacy education. Libr Inform Serv2018; 62: 53–59.
34.
EdwardJL. An affect theory of social exchange. Am J Sociol2001; 107: 321–352.
35.
LiJY. Study of knowledge sharing in virtual communities from the perspective of social exchange theory. Inform Sci2013; 31: 119–123.
36.
BockGWKimYG. Breaking the myths of rewards: an exploratory study of attitudes about knowledge sharing. Inform Resour Manage J2002; 2: 14–21.
37.
BrownJDMegillKL. The cost of good fortune: when positive life events produce negative health consequences. J Pers Soc Psychol1989; 56: 1103–1110.
38.
AdamsGRMarshallSK. A developmental social psychology of identity: understanding the person-in-context. J Adolescence1996; 19: 429–442.
39.
ParcelTL. Differentiation between social groups: studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations. Am J Sociol1978; 86: 1193–1194.
40.
SablinaSKapliyNTrusevichS. How MOOC-takers estimate learning success: retrospective reflection of perceived benefits. Int Rev Res Open Distrib Learn2018; 19: 21–36.
41.
HuangLXJiangYFFuRX. Research on college information literacy education model based on new constructivism learning theory. Libr Inform Serv2014; 58: 35–39.
42.
RichardBCharlesCRaginC. The comparative method: moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. Am J Sociol1989; 95: 825–827.
43.
DengSLFuSX. Applying Qualitative Comparative Analysis to library and information science: a case study of influencing factors of Network community health information seeking. Inform Stud Theor Appl2017; 40: 2311–2328.
44.
GuoYGuoYZhaoYX. Content or context: a study on the behavior mechanism of online users’ knowledge payment – a configuration analysis based on CCC-B framework. Libr Inform Serv2020; 64: 120–130.
45.
FissPC. Building better causal theories: a fuzzy set approach to typologies in organization research. Acad Manag J2011; 54: 392–420.
46.
OrdaniniAParasuramanARuberaG. When the recipe is more important than the ingredients: a qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) of service innovation configurations. J Serv Res2013; 17: 134–149.
47.
RihouxBRaginC. Configurational comparative methods: qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) and related techniques. Washington, DC: SAGE Publications Ltd., 2009, pp. 1–152.
48.
SchneiderCQWagemannC. Doing justice to logical remainders in QCA: moving beyond the standard analysis. Polit Res Quart2013; 66: 211–220.
49.
LightnerCALightner-LawsCA. A blended model: simultaneously teaching a quantitative course traditionally, online, and remotely. Interact Learn Environ2016; 24: 224–238.
50.
MaZYZhangM. A comparative study on undergraduate information literacy education of academic libraries at home and abroad. Res Libr Sci2020; 1: 100–111.
51.
SchiffrinHHLissM. The effects of helicopter parenting on academic motivation. J Child Fam Stud2017; 26: 1–9.
