Hiding in plain sight: the linguistic and behavioural challenges of second language learners in academic search
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47989/ir31ISIC65281Keywords:
search behaviour, search language, query reformulation, search as learningAbstract
Introduction. This study examines the influence of language proficiency on academic online searching, a critical skill in UK higher education. Language has been suggested as a factor shaping search success, particularly for second language English speakers. The investigation explores links between proficiency and search task performance.
Method. Twenty Manchester Metropolitan University students completed a screen-recorded academic search task. Participants included ten first language English (L1) and ten second language English (L2) speakers. Each was asked to locate, evaluate, and record sources for a mock academic assessment.
Analysis. Data were examined through quantitative and qualitative approaches. This involved linguistic and structural coding of search queries, analysis of search engine use, and assessment of collected sources using the CRAAP test for credibility and relevance.
Results. L2 participants demonstrated weaker linguistic control, with limited lexical range, domain mismatches, and semantic errors compared to L1 peers. They also relied less on academic sites and produced lower-scoring sources under the CRAAP criteria.
Conclusion. The study reveals clear disparities in online search between L1 and L2 students, despite shared induction and academic support. Language proficiency appears central to these differences, suggesting that applied linguistics can inform strategies to enhance search practices in higher education.
References
Baker-Bell, A. (2020). Linguistic justice: Black language, literacy, identity, and pedagogy. Routledge.
Blakeslee, S. (2004). The CRAAP test. LOEX Quarterly, 31(3), 4.
Bloom, B., & Deyrup, M. M. (2015). The SHU research logs: Student online search behaviors trans-scripted. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 41(5), 593–601. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2015.07.002
Chang, S., Gomes, C., & McKay, D. (2020). The digital information ecology of international students. In C. Gomes & S. Chang (Eds.), Digital experiences of international students: Challenging assumptions and rethinking engagement (pp. 1–20). Routledge.
Council of Europe. (2024). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment – Companion volume. Council of Europe Publishing.
Dahlen, S. P., Haeger, H., Hanson, K., & Montellano, M. (2020). Almost in the wild: Student search behaviors when librarians aren’t looking. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 46(1), 102096. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2019.102096
Department for Education. (2024). GCSE subject-level guidance for English language (2022). Gov.uk. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/gcse-subject-level-conditions-for-2022/gcse-subject-level-guidance-for-english-language-2022
Fenwick, L., & Herrington, M. (2022). Teacher use of genre pedagogy: Engaging students in dialogue about content area language during text deconstruction. Language and Education, 36(1), 43–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2021.1912082
Georgas, H. (2014). Google vs. the library (part II): Student search patterns and behaviors when using Google and a federated search tool. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 14(4), 503–532. https://doi.org/10.1353/pla.2014.0034
Giroux, H. A., & Penna, A. N. (1979). Social education in the classroom: The dynamics of the hidden curriculum. Theory & Research in Social Education, 7(1), 21–42.
Higher Education Statistics Agency. (2025). Higher education student data: Alternative providers. HESA. https://www.hesa.ac.uk/data-and-analysis
Hyland, K. (2003). Genre-based pedagogies: A social response to process. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(1), 17–29 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(02)00124-8
Johnson, I. (2020). What hides beneath? An evidence-based take on the hidden curriculum of assessment feedback. In T. Hinchcliffe (Ed.), The Hidden Curriculum of Higher Education (pp. 5–28). Advance HE.
Judd, T., & Kennedy, G. (2011). Expediency-based practice? Medical students’ reliance on Google and Wikipedia for biomedical inquiries. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(2), 351–360. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.01019.x
Kuhlthau, C. C. (1991). Inside the search process: Information seeking from the user’s perspective. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42(5), 361–371.
Lewis, A. B. (2018). Tips from the experts: What does bad information look like? Using the CRAAP Test for evaluating substandard resources. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship, (88). https://doi.org/10.5062/F41N7ZC4
Lloyd, A. (2010). Information literacy landscapes: Information literacy in education, workplace and everyday contexts. Elsevier.
Marchionini, G. (1989). Electronic problem scenarios: Integrating computers into instruction. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 30(3), 165–176.
Margolis, E., Soldatenko, M., Acker, S., & Gair, M. (2002). Peekaboo: Hiding and outing the curriculum. In E. Margolis (Ed.), The hidden curriculum in higher education (pp. 11–30). Routledge.
Office for Students. (2023). Office for Students. https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk
Salehi, S., Du, J. T., & Ashman, H. (2018). Use of web search engines and personalisation in information searching for educational purposes. Information Research, 23(2). http://informationr.net/ir/23-2/paper789.html
Sapa, R. (2024). Thematic scope of workshops offered by the libraries of the top universities. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 50(3), 102730. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2024.102880
Sendurur, E., & Gabriel, S. (2024). Evaluation of search engine results pages in various languages and contents: The changes in strategies and criteria. The Electronic Library, 42(2), 173–192. https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-05-2023-0111
Scott, M. (2008). Developing wordsmith. International Journal of English Studies, 8(1), 95-106.
Skelton, N. (2023). Digital strategies in UK higher education: Making digital mainstream. JISC. https://www.jisc.ac.uk/reports/digital-strategies-in-uk-higher-education-making-digital-mainstream
Speirs, N. M. (2020). The hidden curriculum as doxa: Experiences of the working class. In T. Hinchcliffe (Ed.), The hidden curriculum of higher education (pp. 130–141). Advance HE.
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis. Cambridge University Press.
Urgo, K., & Arguello, J. (2022a). Learning assessments in search-as-learning: A survey of prior work and opportunities for future research. Information Processing & Management, 59(2), 102821. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2021.102821
Urgo, K. & Arguello, J. (2022b). Understanding the pathway towards a searcher’s learning objective. ACM Transactions on Information Systems. 40(4) 1–43. https://doi.org/10.1145/3495222
Urgo, K. & Arguello, J. (2025). Search as learning. Foundations and Trends® in Information Retrieval, 19(4) 365–556. https://doi.org/10.1561/1500000084
Van Hees, V., Roeyers, H., & De Mol, J. (2018). Students with autism spectrum disorder and their parents in the transition into higher education: Impact on dynamics in the parent–child relationship. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 48(10), 3296–3310. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-018-3593-y
Zhang, X., Ding, X. Y., Wang, G. S., & Ma, L. (2020). Investigating the influences of social overload and task complexity on user engagement decrease. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 31(15–16), 1774–1787. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2018.1509698
Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia, O., Hartig, J., Goldhammer, F., & Krstev, J. (2021). Students’ online information use and learning progress in higher education: A critical literature review. Studies in Higher Education, 46(10), 1996–2021. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2021.1953336
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Tim Leigh, Frances Johnson
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
