1. Making a difference? Assessment of Information Literacy Education at Linköping University Library Christina Brage and Jenny Betmark Information: Interactions and Impact (i3), June 2009

2. Agenda • About Linköping University • Information Literacy Assessment: Case 1: Medical Programme • Authentic assessment • Information Literacy Assessment: Case 2: TEMA • Conclusions & future directions MARKERINGSYTA FÖR BILDER När du gör egna slides, placera bilder och andra illustrationer inom dessa fält. Titta gärna i ”baspresentationen” för exempel på hur placeringen kan göras.

3. Linköping University • Three campuses • Four faculties • 25 000 Students • 1300 Research students • 3500 Employees • University Library with 4 branches

4. Information Literacy Assessment:Case 1: Medical Programme • Educational profile: PBL (Problem-based learning ) • ”The main actor is the self-supporting, information-seeking student, not the lecturing teacher.” (Fridén K. The librarian as a teacher: experiences from a problem-based setting. Health library review 1996;13:3-7.) • Examination in PBL • Focus on understanding • Examination as part of the learning process • Variety of assessment formats: Portfolio, Peer-assessment, Triple-jump, Multiple Essay Questions, Clinical examinations, Examination in Information Literacy

5. The Examination • During the second semester, compulsory • Cases • 1 ½ day, 80 students, 6 librarians, 10-15 teachers • Individual presentations, 25 minutes • Relaxed and positive atmosphere • Feedback • 5-10% fail

7. Criteria For example, the student has to: • have a well-reasoned strategy • know how to sift and refine the search results • critically evaluate the search results • use several information resources and several search strategies • deliver a tentative solution to the problems in the case Main focus is on understanding and attitude

8. Students • ”Good exercise for the future”, ”Useful knowledge for both studies and professional life” • ”Creative and positive experience”, ”Fun!”, ”Pleasant and instructive” • ”Unfair variations in degree of difficulty in the cases”, ”A frustrating and nervous experience” • ” An opportunity to get total attention and immediate feedback” • ”A possibility to reason and reflect”, ”Good to be forced to do this”

9. Teachers • Contribute with experiences and subject knowledge that librarians lack • Bring valuable insight to both students and librarians about the whole concept of scientific information • Get updated with new search interfaces, techniques and sources • ”It is fascinating to follow the results of the student´s searching and finding scientific literature in a specified area. It is a moment in the examination that also contains a substantial learning activity, not only for the student but also for the teacher”

10. Librarians • Valuable feedback on our education practice • Opinions on library resources • Insight on non-librarian ways to tackle search problems • Receive higher status when participating in this examination

11. Conclusions • No obvious rights or wrongs • An open-minded and reflective approach pays off • Continuously develop the routines for notes during the exam • Information literacy assessment on all undergraduate programs • Investigate teachers’ and students’ opinions on the examination method

12. Authentic assessment • Assessment is changing • - skills and knowledge needed for success • - how students learn • - relationship assessment and instruction

13. Authentic assessment • Requires the students to demonstrate skills and competencies likely to be encountered in daily life • A contrast to traditional testing and evaluation • Motivate the students to show their best performance • A learning experience • Values the thinking behind the work

14. Assessment and Information Literacy • Libraries role in teaching and assessing • Practical level • Libraries function and responsibility • Collaboration

15. Information Literacy AssessmentCase 2: TEMA Multi- and interdisciplinary training and research Climate, energy and recycling Water and food security Geoinformatics

16. Problems • Poor search skills • Lack of familiarity research theory and practice • Cultural clash academic styles

17. Solution • Integrating information literacy • New learning objectives • Assessment • New values and customs • Enculturation • Academic writing

18. Teaching • Basic search skills • Advanced search skills • Anti-plagiarism instruction • Academic writing

19. Outcomes • Higher critical thinking ability • Plagiarism cases decreased • Academic sources used increased • Better writing

20. Conclusions • New forms of assessment powerful tools • Librarians expand the repertoire • Information literacy the development of a mind set

21. Thank You

22. www.liu.se