Information Literacy and Instruction: Reference Consultations and Student Success Outcomes

Abstract

Librarians have offered personal help in the form of reference for well over a century,1 increasingly using technology of one sort or another. During much of that period, reference service was often just that—a “service” where librarians would serve up information and answers to questions from users. Thanks to the proliferation of powerful technologies, however, many individuals now attempt to seek information on their own first, in a vast morass of websites, social media, apps, blogs, wikis (including Wikipedia), videos, podcasts, and more, all vying for eyeballs. When overwhelmed by the sheer amount of information available, and unable to sort through it all to find valid, reliable information, some turn to librarians for help. It is more and more common that assistance takes the form of helping people learn how to learn for themselves, rather than simply providing answers.

Library consultations and a global pandemic: An analysis of consultation difficulty during COVID-19 across multiple factors

“…Regardless of their degree of standardization, data collection and assessment projects focused on reference services in academic libraries tend to center patron service needs ( Scales et al, 2015 ), student experiences and satisfaction ( Murgai, 2012 ; Reiter & Cole, 2019 ; Rogers & Carrier, 2017 ), or student learning outcomes ( Bradley et al, 2020 ; Maddox & Stanfield, 2020 ; Miller, 2018 ; Newton & Feinberg, 2020 ; Sikora & Fournier, 2016 ). The effects on librarians of providing these services and the use of reference statistics in predicting or assessing librarian workload and effort are comparatively little studied.…”

Tracking student learning outcome engagement at the reference desk to facilitate assessment

“…This transition brought with it the emergence of a culture of assessment, focusing on striving to improve student learning relative to formally defined student learning objectives (Garfolo and L'Huiller, 2015;Magruder et al, 1997;Shipman et al, 2003). As integral components of such institutions, academic libraries have likewise transitioned from relying upon counts of resources and resource usage (Iannuzzi, 1999;Miller, 2018) along with measures of customer satisfaction (Diamond, 2004, p. 9;Liebst and Feinmark, 2016) as measures of their value to their parent institutions to a similar focus on student learning as the primary benchmark (Goss, 2022, p 5;Hufford, 2013;Oakleaf, 2010, pp. 37-45;Iannuzzi, 1999).…”

“…, 2003). As integral components of such institutions, academic libraries have likewise transitioned from relying upon counts of resources and resource usage (Iannuzzi, 1999; Miller, 2018) along with measures of customer satisfaction (Diamond, 2004, p. 9; Liebst and Feinmark, 2016) as measures of their value to their parent institutions to a similar focus on student learning as the primary benchmark (Goss, 2022, p 5; Hufford, 2013; Oakleaf, 2010, pp. 37–45; Iannuzzi, 1999).…”

The methodology used to deliver information literacy instruction by a select group of academic librarians: a case study

“…However, we cannot ignore the fact that there is increased use of technology in delivering ILI. This is coupled with the empowered independence of students to use social media to seek information on their own via a plethora of websites and social media platforms (Miller, 2018). This technological proliferation has given rise to the integration of a variety of methodologies in the delivery of ILI.…”