Assessment of Library Instruction on Undergraduate Student Success in a Documents-Based Research Course: The Benefits of Librarian, Archivist, and Faculty Collaboration

Abstract

This article discusses a successful collaboration between multiple subject specialist librarians, the University Archivist and a faculty member teaching an undergraduate course in documents-based social science research. This collaborative partnership allowed for each subject specialist to expose students to specific information literacy skills they needed to be successful in their class. The authors used pre- and postassessments to gauge student comfort level in conducting library research, as well as a rubric to assess the annotated bibliography of a student’s final research paper. The data from these assessment tools are analyzed and the results discussed. The data indicates that students benefited from the specialized instruction they received.

Academic libraries and student learning outcomes

“…Foremost, authors highlighted outcomes assessments that centered on students’ demonstration of their information learning skills in authentic situations (Cmor et al , 2010; Whitlock and Nanavati, 2013). In this instance, assessments focused on students’ creation of research papers, class projects, bibliographies, search logs, oral presentations, and other assignments (Burd, 2003; Cooney and Hiris, 2003; Hutchins, 2003; Judd et al , 2004; Kinsley et al , 2014; Lacy and Chen, 2013; Macklin, 2007; Pan et al , 2014; Rapchak and Cipri, 2015; Schroeder, 2003; Victor et al , 2013).…”

“…In addition, outcomes assessments included comparative techniques such as the administration of pretests and posttests to illustrate students’ attainment of learning outcomes (Carter, 2002; Hufford, 2010; Hufford and Paschel, 2010; Portmann and Roush, 2004; Radom et al , 2013; Staley et al , 2010). Posttests were aimed at identifying areas for improving library skills instruction and many supplemented authentic outcomes assessments (Carter, 2002; Hufford, 2010; Hufford and Paschel, 2010; Staley et al , 2010; Victor et al , 2013). In addition, the literature discussed other comparative techniques including between students exposed to different instruction or instructional environments with those individuals that had not received the training (Beile and Boote, 2005; Daland, 2015; McCabe and Wise, 2009; McCarthy and Heald, 2003; Portmann and Roush, 2004; Serotkin, 2006; White and Cheng, 2016).…”

Constructing data literacy evaluation system for social science scholars

“…Ridsdale et al (2015) proposed that data literacy and information literacy overlap. Stephenson and Caravello (2007) and Victor et al (2013) pointed out that there are similarities between data literacy and information literacy in data or information acquisition, management, analysis, and evaluation; data literacy is a special form of information literacy in practice. Stephenson and Caravello (2007) also emphasized that data literacy is a component of information literacy in social sciences.…”

The Art of Referencing as an Often Overlooked Aspect of Scientific Literacy: Study of a Classroom Intervention

“…Though referencing and basic scientific literacy is taught in science classes (Huerta & McMillan, 2000;Justice et al, 2007;Freeman & Lynd-Balta, 2010;Berger et al, 2012), the emphasis is usually largely placed specifically upon scientific literacy and not upon the art of referencing. For example, there are several descriptions of courses or assignments in which students learn about finding references and writing a paper (Janick- Buckner, 1997;Huerta & McMillan, 2000;Victor et al, 2013). Norris and Phillips (2003) also discuss scientific literacy and the understanding of concepts in text, sound logic, and correct interpretation of text.…”