University Library
Information Competence in the Freshmen Interest Group
Project Assessment
Information Competence in the Freshmen Interest
Group
Project Assessment
Assessment of the project was built into all aspects of the grant, from the
use of pre- and post- tests to the exit interviews at the end of the semester.
Overall, students met the goals of the project, demonstrating an enhanced understanding
of information competence by the end of the semester. They exhibited a better
understanding of information, its uses, etc. They clearly indicated greater
comfort in asking for help in the library. However, while all the students were
introduced to a variety of types of resources and indicated an awareness of
a variety of sources, a majority still demonstrated heavy reliance on the web.
Evaluation skills also improved, but will need to be constantly revisited.
In general, faculty and peer mentors experienced a range of self-described
learning. Some believed the training was primarily a refresher course for them,
a thorough review of their own previously gained knowledge of information competence,
whereas others appreciated mastering the subtleties of the discipline. Some
instructors were especially appreciative of the advanced knowledge of a wide
variety of databases gained by participating in library workshops with their
students. Most importantly, all appreciated the more systematic approach to
the standards, and the kind of structure this approach offered to their own
teaching.
Moreover, most of the faculty participants indicated the knowledge they had
gained from the program would alter how they write assignments, not only for
the Freshman Seminar, but in their other classes as well. All recognized the
grant was beneficial in terms of faculty development and was applicable beyond
the curriculum of the Freshman Seminar class.
Assessment Tools
Pre- and Post-tests:
Pre- and post- test were administered to all students, faculty and peer advisors
participating in the project. The questions were designed to relate to the five
ACRL standards.
Student Responses to Pre- and Post- Tests A) indicates pre-test
answers B) indicates post-test answers
- When using a library online catalog, what is the difference between a keyword
search and a subject search?
- Students generally failed to understand the difference between keyword
and subject searching.
- Responses on the post- test indicated an understanding of the distinction
by over half of the students.
- You have been given the topic of racism on which to write a research paper.
Because this is such a broad topic, how would you narrow it topic down?
- Responses to this question indicated many students were capable of narrowing
a broad topic.
- Little change from the pre-test.
- If you find a citation to a book or article that this library does not own
and you want it for your research, what would you do?
- Responses to this question indicated students generally were unaware
of the options.
- Responses to this question indicated students had gained a better understanding
of access options.
- You are doing a research project on abortion. You have been given several
articles, books, and websites. What are some of the questions you would ask
yourself in evaluating the information you were given? List as many questions
as come to mind?
- Students had a very difficult time on the question that asked them to
talk about how they would evaluate resources for a given topic. Their
answers seemed to indicate what type of information they would look for
rather than how they would evaluate the information.
- The post-test demonstrated an improved understanding but, clearly indicated
there is still a great need for improvement.
- You are working in a group to study the homeless in your community. You
have been asked to make recommendations to your City Council. Your task is
to provide up-to-date information on the current state of homelessness in
your community.
- What type of information do you need to know?
- Students generally answered with a variety of appropriate responses.
- Students generally answered with a variety of appropriate responses
often going more in-depth than on the pre-test.
- How would you present the information to the City Council? Write as
many ideas as come to mind.
- Students generally answered with a variety of appropriate responses.
- Students generally answered with a variety of appropriate responses,
often going more in-depth than on the pre-test.
- You have just finished a final project for your class. You used a variety
of information sources books, music, interviews, websites, photographs,
and email correspondence? Which of these sources will you include in your
bibliography?
- Approximately half of the students answered correctly while several
missed only one or two choices.
- Almost all of the students answered correctly.
- Do you think scholars, musicians, artists, writers, and others should have
control over the use of their of their work including financial compensation,
recognition, etc.? Why or Why not?
- Many of the students responded negatively to this question. Several
indicated that a person should be flattered is someone wanted to use their
work.
- Answers indicated an improved understanding. However, while the majority
of students recognized the need to cite materials, many indicated a lack
of understanding of the reasons for citing all sources, all the time.
Faculty and Peer Advisor Responses
- On the pre- test, faculty generally answered the questions correctly. However,
there was only one faculty member out of the five who answered the entire
test correctly. Others exhibited need for enhanced learning. On the post-test,
all answered correctly.
- Peer Advisors answers either mirrored the student answers or were slightly
better. On the post-test all answered correctly.
Mid-semester meeting
At the mid point in the semester a general meeting of the five instructors was
convened in order to determine where the different teams were in their implementation
of the research component of their seminars. Instructors were also asked to
identify any additional help needed from the library or the project coordinator.
The general sense was that students were, as students will do, procrastinating;
their lack of engagement was also seen as a major stumbling block. It was roundly
acknowledged that, if nothing else, learning the eventual consequences of procrastination
would be a valuable lesson for many students, and we could simply continue to
try to keep the students on track throughout the semester.
Class presentations
The presentations of student research took a variety of forms. Some sections
requested short, 5-minute oral reports on the students findings. Another
section required students to stage a debate around their issue. Yet another
built a website offering information on all of the various California environmental
issues researched by the students. Interestingly, the group that had resisted
the project most energetically complained in the end because they were not given
sufficient time during which to present all of their work. All of the classes
incorporated some written assignment in conjunction with the oral presentations,
as well as a bibliography.
Exit interviews with FS students
The Library representative met with some of the classes to talk about their
projects. Discussions were candid with a variety of responses ranging from the
benefit of the project to the lack of need for the project. Students indicated
a great appreciation for extra librarian contact time and stressed the importance
of the transference of their newly acquired knowledge to other classes. Students
also indicated a greater comfort level in using the library and approaching
library staff. Criticisms included a need for the restructuring of the library
drop-in workshops and more class time devoted to discussing the projects. Overall,
most students felt the project was worthwhile, that it should remain a fundamental
component of the class.
Exit Interviews with Instructional Teams
End of semester interviews were conducted with each of the Educational Mentoring
Teams involved in the project. This included approximately an hour of one-on-one
discussion with the team, the project coordinator and the library representative.
|