1 / 33

Measuring student information literacy learning outcomes

Measuring student information literacy learning outcomes. Gabriela Sonntag California State University San Marcos LAC 2008.

thiery
Download Presentation

Measuring student information literacy learning outcomes

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. Measuring student information literacy learning outcomes Gabriela Sonntag California State University San Marcos LAC 2008

  2. “the unanimous conclusion from the testing done and from personal observation is that most students are seriously lacking in knowledge and ability to use books and libraries effectively.” Felix Snider (1974)

  3. CSUSM facts:Undergraduates 8,577Graduates 582Full-time Faculty 187Bachelor’s Degrees 27Master’s Degrees 10 Top degrees:business , biology, communication, psychology, kinesiology, human development, pre-nursing, sociology. CSU system: 23 campuses, 450,000+ students , 47,000 faculty and staff. Kellogg library at the California State University in San Marcos

  4. Three assessments

  5. Overall Results

  6. GEL Pre/Post Scores

  7. GEO Pre/Post Scores

  8. Three assessments

  9. “…discussing assessment methods collaboratively is a very productive exercise in planning a systematic, comprehensive information literacy program. This assessment program …..should make explicit to the institution’s constituencies how information literacy contributes to producing educated students and citizens.” (Information Literacy Competency Standards, p. 6)

  10. General Education • Cycle 1: Written Communication and Information Literacy • Rounds: each semester select an Area to focus on: several classes in each Area, several sections of each class: • Round 1: (GE Writing) and (Critical Thinking) • Round 2: (Quant Reasoning) and (US History) • Round 3: (Social sciences)

  11. The Assessments

  12. Information Literacy Finding appropriate sources: Students can locate appropriate references for their papers and assignments. Using sources: Students interpret and use the information found in their paper and assignments.

  13. Results

  14. Comparison possible?

  15. iSkills Using Information Data

  16. Three assessments

  17. Annual Assessments and Program Reviews • Required self-study includes assessment of Programmatic Student Learning Outcomes. • Includes annual assessment findings – benchmarking, changes, evidence of impact. • Plans for next cycle of assessment studies.

  18. IL Assessment • Programmatic Student Learning Outcomes are Standards for Information Literacy (ACRL). • Annual assessments are embedded. • Measured student knowledge of characteristics of scholarly information sources (Evaluate).

  19. Results

  20. Scores by year

  21. Deeper study

  22. Mean Scores by Course

  23. Mean Scores by Major

  24. Class score cross tabulation

  25. Comparison Possible: Evaluate?

  26. Economics Learning Outcomes measured: • Formulate meaningful economic questions (4.57) • Retrieve information (2.43) • Apply relevant concepts (4.14) • Effectively communicate (3.86) Conclusion: “more direct incorporation of library resources”

  27. History Learning Outcome measured: “incorporate new digital and multimedia formats into the practice and presentation of history” specifically “questions about what issues are raised in using the Internet for research…” Conclusion: “we should address this issue in more detail than we do… .discussing not just how one can judge reliability of a source but also how to sift through even the most reliable sources [for evidence]….”

  28. Political Science Learning Outcomes measured: “Demonstrate working knowledge of research methods” Pre-test score of 9.8 -weakness in formulating research questions, sampling, drawing conclusions. Post-test score of 17.7 -general improvement but especially in formulating research questions, hypotheses, and identifying appropriate research methodology.

  29. Psychology Learning outcomes measured: Information Literacy • Faculty survey on student IL abilities : • 57% reported students find it difficult to locate sources. • 45.3% students need help with evaluating sources • 26.4% students lack synthesis skills (using information) • General Education Assessment

  30. Results: Superior Rating

  31. Sociology Learning Outcome measured: Write a literature review and research report. Assessed research papers in capstone seminar. Interviewed faculty teaching course. • Locate: 81.5% • Understand: 39.5% • Summarize/Synthesize (USING): 36.8% • Mechanics: 36.8%

  32. Conclusions • Need for multiple measures. • Need for collaboration with academic departments. • Strive for improvement.

  33. Future Goals • Year 2 measure Define. • Engage the university community in dialog on teaching, learning, and information literacy. • Look to departmental assessments and program reviews for inclusion of IL.

More Related