A Baseline Information Literacy Assessment of Biology Students

Ferguson, Jessame E.; Neely, Teresa Y.; Sullivan, Kathryn

doi:10.5860/rusq.46n2.61

Cited by 31 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The notable exception was found with the statement: "I can identify key words to search for information on my research question", which declined in fall 2015 semester and increased only marginally in spring 2016 term. This is consistent with previous observations that students often overrate their mastery of information literacy (Ferguson et al, 2006;Kim and Shumaker, 2015), especially in regard to selection of key words (Bloom & Deyrup, 2015;Dalal et al, 2015;Dempsey & Valenti, 2016).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Enhancing Information Literacy Using Bernard Lonergan's Generalized Empirical Method: A Three-year Case Study in a First Year Biology Course

Rose-Wiles

Glenn

Stiskal

2017

The Journal of Academic Librarianship

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThe purpose is to illustrate how a team of 3 faculty from different disciplines sought to increase select information literacy outcomes of first year biology students using Bernard J. Lonergan's cognitional theory, the Generalized Empirical Method (GEM). The majority of students entering college have little experience in finding, retrieving, understanding, evaluating, incorporating, and citing scholarly sources in their scientific research papers. One factor may be a lack of library instruction and research experience in high school (Head, 2013;Smith et al., 2013;Douglas & Rabinowitz, 2016). Even for those with prior instruction, transitioning from high school level assignments to college level research can be a formidable challenge (Bent, 2008;Warwick et al., 2009;Varlejs et al., 2014;Loesch, 2017). In addition, few students understand the system of scholarly publishing or the structure of scientific information (Badke, 2012). They do not grasp the relationship between articles, journals, and library databases or the difference between searching a scientific database and using search engines such as Google. In her seminal paper "Desperately Seeking Citations: Uncovering faculty assumptions about the undergraduate research", Leckie (1996) describes how undergraduates have only the vaguest ideas about the research and scholarly publication process; they conceptualize research as "a fuzzy, library-based activity that is required of them to complete their coursework" (p. 202-203). A follow-up report (Rose-Wiles & Hofmann, 2013) suggests that little has changed in almost three decades, and that dependence on databases and on-line articles, rather than searching in physical journals, makes the library-based research process even more confusing for naïve undergraduate students.Science is a research-driven discipline, and therefore students should possess the requisite search skills. They have heard of the scientific method, but seem to associate it solely with completing hands-on experiments or Eureka style discovery rather than with background reading, hypothesis formation and testing and finally communication of results. As Cervetti and Pearson (2012) note, students treat science texts as if they contained established truths, without understanding how facts are determined or thinking of science as way of answering questions. Furthermore, most first year science students do not know how 4 PREPRINT: Enhancing information literacy using Bernard Lonergan's Generalized Empirical Method to generate interesting research questions that would lead to the discovery of new information and contribute to their learning. Even within a science course, the students' laboratory experiences seldom go beyond replicating well-established observations, with minimal dialog when reporting the results.Students often lack an understanding of how a literature search contributes to an in-depth discussion of their laboratory results. Thus to succeed in college, students must transition from replication of data obtained in a highly ...

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Enhancing Information Literacy Using Bernard Lonergan's Generalized Empirical Method: A Three-year Case Study in a First Year Biology Course

Rose-Wiles

Glenn

Stiskal

2017

The Journal of Academic Librarianship

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…12 Their survey results were primarily from biology students; the survey found that students report a high level of comfort seeking information, and prefer to get the information on the web. 13 The researchers' data confirmed that students overestimated their searching skills and their ability to evaluate sources.…”

Section: Research Questionsmentioning

confidence: 75%

Information Literacy in the Sciences: Faculty Perception of Undergraduate Student Skill

Perry

2017

CRL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Academic librarians need reliable information on the needs of faculty teaching undergraduates about seeking and using information. This study describes information gathered from semistructured interviews of teaching faculty in the sciences from several Boston-area colleges. The interview results provided insight into science faculty attitudes toward student research skill and ability. Faculty articulated what they wanted from students seeking research articles, including finding where the gaps were. They described their concerns about threats to research integrity including conflicts of interest and Open Access publishing. Study results will prove useful for librarians trying to better serve the needs of their science faculty.In a recent lecture, Paul Sturges recounted a story about the gap between perception and user needs, which inspired this study. A development organization in Zimbabwe created toilets for a village; returning to the village some time later, they discovered they had been converted to grain stores.1 The development experts perceived a need for toilets, but the villagers needed grain stores, an error easily avoided by asking users about their needs. Instruction librarians sometimes make the same type of error. Librarians can approach information literacy instruction with their own perception of the type of instruction the students need without fully understanding the needs of faculty or students in the discipline. Additional information about what faculty expect from instruction will assist librarians in providing students with disciplineappropriate instruction.Information literacy (IL) is viewed as an essential skill for college students; it is defined as "a set of abilities requiring individuals to recognize when information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate and use effectively the needed information."2 The IL competencies can be seen as generic skills, consistent across disciples or specific skills within a disciplinary lens. The standards themselves use both the language of universality and discipline specificity.3 While the best way to achieve IL competency for students is through collaboration between disciplinary faculty and librarians, collaboration is not always seen in all situations. 4 The Association of College and Research Libraries has recently developed the Frameworks for Information Literacy

show abstract

“…Several studies have monitored the success of stand-alone library instruction courses or modules embedded within introductory science courses, primarily using assessments containing multiple-choice items measuring recognition of library tools, citation formats, and so on. 11 Other researchers have developed broader information literacy assessment tools requiring analysis of graphics, documents, and simulations, 12 but these assessments are not tailored to the sciences. Conversely, the Test of Scientific Literacy Skills (TOSLS) 13 is clearly science-focused.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Novel Assessment Tool for Quantitative Evaluation of Science Literature Search Performance: Application to First-Year and Senior Undergraduate Biology Majors

Blank¹,

McGaughey²,

Keeling³

et al. 2017

CRL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Expertise in searching and evaluating scientific literature is a requisite skill of trained scientists and science students, yet information literacy instruction varies greatly among institutions and programs. To ensure that science students acquire information literacy skills, robust methods of assessment are needed. Here, we describe a novel tool for longitudinal, crossover assessment of literature-searching skills in science students and apply it to a cross-sectional assessment of literature-searching performance in 145 first-year and 43 senior biology majors. Subjects were given an open-ended prompt requiring them to find multiple sources of information addressing a particular scientific topic. A blinded scorer used a rubric to score the resources identified by the subjects and generate numerical scores for source quality, source relevance, and citation quality. Two versions of the assessment prompt were given to facilitate eventual longitudinal study of individual students in a crossover design. Seniors were significantly more likely to find relevant, peer-reviewed journal articles, provide appropriate citations, and provide correct answers to other questions about scientific literature. This assessment tool accommodates large numbers of students and can be modified easily for use in other disciplines or at other levels of education.doi:10.5860/crl.77.6.682 crl15-842 A Novel Assessment Tool for Quantitative Evaluation 683Introduction Trained scientists in diverse disciplines share certain fundamental skills, and educators in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) aim to train students in these cross-disciplinary skills in addition to the skills and knowledge of specific disciplines. Several of these fundamental skills are enumerated within the concept of science information literacy, which has been defined "as a set of abilities to identify the need for information, procure the information, evaluate the information and subsequently revise the strategy for obtaining the information, to use the information and to use it in an ethical and legal manner, and to engage in lifelong learning." 1 Trained scientists must apply these skills routinely, whereas high school students typically evaluate sources and information on a more limited basis.2 To develop these skills in undergraduate students, STEM curricula must incorporate information literacy. 3 However, information literacy instruction varies greatly among institutions and programs. 4 Likewise, assessment of information literacy varies widely in format, information skills and knowledge tested, time frame over which students are monitored, and degree to which student inputs are standardized and measurements are comparable between studies (see table 1).

show abstract

A Baseline Information Literacy Assessment of Biology Students

Cited by 31 publications

References 5 publications

Enhancing Information Literacy Using Bernard Lonergan's Generalized Empirical Method: A Three-year Case Study in a First Year Biology Course

Enhancing Information Literacy Using Bernard Lonergan's Generalized Empirical Method: A Three-year Case Study in a First Year Biology Course

Information Literacy in the Sciences: Faculty Perception of Undergraduate Student Skill

A Novel Assessment Tool for Quantitative Evaluation of Science Literature Search Performance: Application to First-Year and Senior Undergraduate Biology Majors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About