1 / 18

Assessing Incoming Undergraduates' Information Literacy Skills: A Comparative Study

This study evaluates the information literacy skills of psychology undergraduates to determine the effectiveness of the training program. It compares Level 1 and Level 2 students across various skill areas and provides insights into their abilities and preferences. The findings suggest a need for ongoing support and improvement in IL training.

evan
Télécharger la présentation

Assessing Incoming Undergraduates' Information Literacy Skills: A Comparative Study

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. How information literate are our incoming undergraduates? Angela Newton

  2. Background • 2004 Major review of IL training for Psychology undergraduates undertaken with Dr Amanda Harrison • We needed proof that it was worthwhile • Did the students need IL training? • What skills do they come with from A Level? • High achievers at A Level: ABB • Does our IL training programme work? • Will the students improve over time? • Does ability in IL map onto academic performance?

  3. The survey • 20 MCQs • Quick to carry out, quick to mark • Excellent model from QREPUQ (1) • Partly based on SCONUL 7 Pillars Model (2) • Lots of departmental experience of assessment with MCQs • Level 1 students (321 in total, 139 single hons Psychology) • Level 2 students (206 in total, 187 single hons Psychology)

  4. Survey questions 6 skill areas: • Recognising an information need • Identify ways to fill an information need • Construct a search strategy • Locate and access information • Compare and evaluate information • Organise and apply information

  5. Level 1 v Level 2 (t = -7.033, df = 287, p < 0.001)

  6. Recognising an information need • Both groups performed well • Two bright groups of students with very little difference between their scores • A higher level 2 score would be preferable showing increased self-awareness • Is this a skill that can be taught?

  7. Identify ways to fill an information need • Mean scores: • Level 1 8.8 • Level 2 41.8 • Level 1 students show a significant preference for searching the internet • They perceive the internet as the most current source of information • Level 2 students show a preference for the Library catalogue and journals • They think journals are the most current source of information but incorrectly identify how to find articles

  8. Identify ways to fill an information need: Attitudes to the internet • If I want to find out about journal articles on “The prevalence of drug abuse in the UK”, I would search in:

  9. Constructing a search strategy • Both groups lack experience/knowledge of: • Keyword selection • Truncation • Boolean • Level 2 demonstrated that they had learned some techniques through exposure to PsycINFO in the preceding semester

  10. Constructing a search strategy: Mean scores

  11. Locating and accessing information • Mean scores: • Level 1 33.6 • Level 2 52.2 • Similar performance on field searching questions • Level 2 significantly better in some areas: • 70.8% could identify a reference to a journal article • 15.2% level 1 students answered the same question correctly • Level 1 students unfamiliar with exploiting bibliographies for further reading • Neither group particularly aware of subject information gateways

  12. Locating and accessing information: Finding journal articles • You are looking for this article from the November 2003 issue of Internet Guide: The validity of internet questionnaires by Jennifer Platt. To check that the Library has it in stock you would search the catalogue for:

  13. Compare and evaluate information • Mean scores: • Level 1 72.6 • Level 2 80.6 • Level 1 show a preference for searching the internet but also show that they understand it can be unreliable • Do they use the internet because they are not yet aware of the alternatives? • Level 2 students have a greater awareness of peer review

  14. Compare and evaluate information: What is an abstract? • You have found a reference to a journal article, how would you assess whether it would be useful to read before getting the full article?

  15. Organise and apply information • Both groups scored well • Very low percentage of ‘Don’t know’ answers • Impressive 70.1% of level 1 students understood plagiarism, increasing to 85% at level 2 • Small number of students thought that re-writing information from a text in your own words without referencing is acceptable

  16. Summary of findings

  17. Conclusions • Did the students need IL training? • Yes! • What skills do they come with from A Level? • Surprisingly good skills, but selectively good • Does our IL training programme work? • Yes! • Will the students improve over time? • Yes! Given our continued support • Does ability in IL map onto academic performance? • Yes!

  18. Action plan • Revise parts of the questionnaire! • Follow the 2004-2005 intake to level 3 • Undertake analysis of questionnaire against A Levels, year on year performance and final degree result. • Monitor student attendance at information literacy workshops provided • Disseminate findings of survey

More Related