Information literacy/user instruction

Introduction

Academic libraries and database providers offer a wide variety of, often interactive, online tutorials, which are presented as a good alternative for the person-to-person instructions by information specialists. We studied how effective interactive tutorials are in the context of library or information literacy instructions (ILI).

Within academic libraries information literacy instruction (ILI) was in the past mostly offered in one-to-one person sessions or in small groups, to maximize the impact on information literacy competences (ILC) of the students. These optimal educational settings are often not possible. Academic libraries have to deal with a growing student population and are more and more asked to participate in curricular teachings of larger groups of students.  This evolution puts a large workload on the library therefore in our institution we experimented with different educational methods to master this workload.  Video tutorials were studied as a possible alternative for ILI. Video tutorials have a 24/24 and remote availability allowing just-in time self-study of the student.  Moreover these tutorials can be used as an educational tool in different settings, such as continuous user support systems.

Study environment and population

In the present study the efficiency of Video tutorials, to obtain IL competences, was studied within the context of a curricular course to first year Bachelor students in Biomedical Sciences at Ghent University. Therefore the assessment of the effect of online tutorials had to be studied while using other active learning tools and formal ILI in a classroom environment.  The course consisted of 15 hours of theory and 15 hours of active learning on PC given by information specialists.

The study population started with 176 first year Bachelor students in Biomedical Sciences. We used excluding criteria for students who dropped out during the first months and for those who doubled their year.  The final study cohort consisted of 141 students.

Objectives of the study

In an attempt to improve the ILC we investigated the teaching methodologies and searched for the most effective educational formats to enrich the IL training process.

Methods

The study had to be performed within a setting of blended learning. Therefore we studied the effect of the Video tutorials compared to other already applied activating interventions both in theory and practice parts of the course. The digital learning environment was used to communicate with the students, to provide learning materials and to perform digital assessments.

The interventions studied were:

1. In October 2011 the students were divided into two groups for the practice training. Group 1 received a self-study assignment of PubMed using a selection of online Video tutorials. Group 2 received a hands-on and example-guided instruction by the information specialist. A self-assessment test was given to both groups. 
2. In December 2011 a cross-over with a similar division of the total group was applied for the training of Web-of-Science. Group 1 received formal ILI teaching, and group 2 engaged in self-study of the Video tutorials. Also here a self-assessment test was administered, and a questionnaire given to the students to evaluate the degree of satisfaction.
3. In the theory course, students were activated by the use of voting devices on several occasions.
4. Finally we provided self-assessment tasks on the digital learning platform. This allowed the students to keep on practicing and to “feel” their own progress.

Results

The results of  the PubMed training indicate no significant difference in the learning outcomes between both groups.  

The results of the Web-of-Science training (WOS) shows also no group differences in the acquisition of ILC, despite the observation of all trainers that group 1 was intellectually stronger and more competitive.The WOS test gives better results, probably because the students became more digital competent by the prior PubMed test.

Finally the results of the PubMed and Web-of-Science cross-over tests were compared to the results at the examinations of the present and previous three years.These results indicate a slightly better study outcome, although more consecutive results are needed to confirm this evolution and exclude individual group effects.

Discussion

The PubMed and Web-of-Science tutorial interventions have effects on the global learning outputs of all students, but no significant group differences can be observed. However, students who used the tutorials where more eager to train and keep on training. This could be measured, by their higher than comparison group presence, in the digital learning environment. We therefore postulate that they acquired a basic level of IL faster than the control group. It was also observed that the remote access of the tutorial worked as a permanent form of feedback whereby students were noted to have less questions for rehearsal in the formal courses. The course speed turned out to be higher than in previous years. So, more time was left for practice and more complex questioning during the formal course hours. These findings by the teaching staff and the results of the final examination outputs confirm findings in literature that the “method of instruction does not influence students retention of IL skills. All methods can be equally as effective.” (Andersona K.,2010 )

Although each group was tested immediately after each intervention, there are no indications that any specific activation method was more successful than another.  We must conclude that any method of activation in the educational process will make the students more motivated and also has a positive influence on the trainers. Some kind of positive flow is created, which eventually results in more and better ILC. The best way to teach IL is still a debate, and trying to anticipate to as many individual (in) dependent variables of the learning process as possible is a real challenge. We refer to the contribution of Dumont H. on this matter: “Learning is also individually different, which means that its processes and outcomes vary among students on a variety of pertinent variables. Encouraging and sustaining effective learning therefore means that school should provide as much as possible adaptive education (Glaser, 1977) to take account of these differences.” (Dumont H.,2010)

Our study design evaluates the effects of different educational activation methods within a setting of blended learning. The impossibility to identify the most effective tool, leads to the conclusion that the information specialists should be able to design and use a diversity of educational tools in different settings. The blended activation approach meets better the diversity in education needs, whereby the results on group level improve  Video tutorials are just one of the many effective tools for library or information literacy instruction. Blending of different formats meets the diverse learning needs of the individuals in the group and increases the learning motivation of both students and trainers. The fine-tuning of the blend will certainly evolve over the next years.

Introduction

The  American Library Association (ALA 2000) defines Information Literacy (IL) as “a set of abilities requiring individuals to recognize when information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate, and use effectively the needed information”. These information and communication skills are increasingly essential to succeed in academic studies. The best possible instruments to acquire the skills are still at debate. The personal recognition of his or her information needs has been recognized as a powerful drive in the building up of the required capacities of the students. The possible role of repeated self-efficacy (SE) testing in information literacy therefore merits further evaluation.

Study environment and population

The present study population is a group of 50 Bachelor students enrolled in a curricular course of information resources of the first bachelor year of Biomedical Sciences at Ghent University. The IL-course requires 15 hours class teaching and 15 hours active PC-based group instruction. The study population was selected from a cohort of 142 first timers. Students who had to repeat their first year were excluded, as the first year learning process of the same materials could influence their ratings. Furthermore we used for the present analysis only these students who participated trustfully in the other evaluative activities organized in the cohort to permit multifactor analysis. Full testing included the first scale (GEN-ILSE) developed by Kurbanoglu, Akkoyunlu & Umay (2006), the list of  10 IL skills ( from basic to advanced), important for the biomedical context (BIO-ILSE) developed specifically for the course, pre- en post-Progress Test on Information Literacy (PTIL) especially designed for the Faculty of Medicine of Ghent University and finally the participation in the first semester examination session. For more details on these tests, see methodology section. Full and trustable results of all tests were found in 50 students, the final study group. For the present study only the results on information literacy self-efficacy (ILSE) will be considered.

Research Questions

Applying the SE-tests twice, in the beginning and the end of the course, made us formulate two research questions. First, we focused on the changes between the first and second test to study the influence of the learning process on the results of the self-efficacy tests. Secondly we wanted to know if – inversely – the self-efficacy tests improve the learning process and the examination results.

Methods

To assess the ILSE competences two different questionnaires were used. First we used the test for assessment of non-specific or general information literacy self-efficacy (GEN-ILSE) developed by Kurbanoglu, Akkoyunlu & Umay (2006). The scale is composed of 7 factors and 28 items. The factors of the scale are determined as “defining the need for information”, “initiating the search strategy”, “locating and accessing the resources”, “assessing and comprehending the information”, “interpreting, synthesizing, and using the information”, “communicating the information” and “evaluating the product and process”. These skills are mandatory in a general context of IL or education. 

Secondly we administered a SE-questionnaire on the specific IL- needs in Biomedical Sciences (BIO-ILSE). This second test evaluates 10 additional IL skills (from basic to advanced), important for the biomedical context. The personal degree of confidence is evaluated on a scale of 0–100. Students were confident they could answer without inhibitions, because their results would not be taken in account in their study results, and the results would not be communicated to the examiners before the end of the examination period. Both ILSE-tests were administered at the beginning (pre-SE) of the academic year and at the end of the course (post-SE). The participation to the tests was on a voluntary base, as required by the ethical committee of the institution.

The pre- en post-SE questionnaires were administered together with a pre- en post-Progress Test on Information Literacy (PTIL) designed specifically towards the educational outputs of the Faculty of Medicine of Ghent University. The PTIL-test consists of 30 questions and measures the basic to advanced skills of IL within the context of medical and health studies. The test has been developed to monitor the evolution of the students over all years of their degrees.

Lastly, the examination results of the course were used to assess the final outputs of the students.  

Results

Within the limited time context of the EAHIL meeting, we present here only these results relevant to the two specific research questions. Also, the results are not yet complete, and given the number of factors studies will require further analysis. Comparison of selected questions of the pre- and post course ILSE tests are shown in table 1. These results suggest that the summation of the results of all students for most factors show higher confidence in the post-ILSE questionnaire. However, major individual differences are noted. (Table 1)

In the first item (“Limit search strategies by subject, language and date “), the confidence of students, after intervention, is prominently higher. More than half of the students report a scale of confidence of 81% or more at the end of the course. Three students even feel then 100% confident. Within the course, examples were worked out and self-evaluated exercises were offered. So the degree of confidence in the use of limits in search strategies reflects the true acquisition of the skill.

In the second item (“Write a research paper”), almost no changes were noted. The scale of SE has changed for 43 students, but the general degree of confidence stays very low, 32 of the 50 students have a SE lower as 50%. These results are no surprise, as writing a research paper can be seen as an advanced IL skill and the required competences were not taught in this first bachelor course.

For the third item (“Define the information I need”) a remarkable pattern is noted. Sixty percent of the  students feel less confident to define the information they need. This means that during the course they acknowledged that this competence was more difficult to obtain than they thought before the course.

The last item (“Confidence in the use of web of science”) reflects the impact of active learning and hands-on training. Confidence in the use of the database has increased in the large majority.

 Also other IL-skills specific to the biomedical curriculum gave the same increase in confidence level of the student population, although nobody still reported “full” confidence. Examples of these comparable items are: the use of PubMed, MeSH and factual databases

The results of the 2 ILSE-questionnaires correspond with the results of the PTIL and the final examination. It can therefore be concluded that the study population completed the ILSE-questionnaire fairly and the data can be seen as a good reflection of the ILSE of this group.

Discussion

Bandura ( 1977) defined self-efficacy as a belief in one’s own capabilities to organize and execute the course of action required to attain a goal. In general terms, SE is a basic human belief in one’s ability to successfully perform a task or a performance. The belief in his own efficacies and capabilities seems more important to the user than the true level of his capabilities. SE is an important player in today’s information-based society. Information literacy self-efficacy, this is the perception of someone’s own capabilities, is a meaningful factor in becoming an information literate person. High SE will determine how resilient students will be and how much effort they will expend on an activity. Students being self-assured are less put off to use new information sources and will not give up when encountering a problem in their search strategies. Persistence or resilience is crucial for information problem solving, self-regulated learning and lifelong learning (Kurbanoglu 2006). IL-training should be incorporated early in the curricula (Kingsley 2011), so it can help students to build up their competencies and SE. The context or specific domain wherein SE is evaluated is considered to be important, as an individual can be more or less confident according the discipline, domain or other situational difference.

Educational intervention activates the process of learning and self-learning (Kiliç-Cakmak 2010). This results in the development of critical thinking and the acquisition of expertise. On the other hand we noticed students can overestimate their abilities.  We note three different developments in the studied ILSE:

1. Educational intervention on search strategies and specific content related IL univocally increased self-efficacy . The target of the acquisition of intermediate IL-skills – according to the ALA definitions - is achieved in our students.
2. The decrease of ILSE in the case of defining the information needed, a basic IL skill, shows the educational value of repeated SE-testing. By the beginning of the course, the students did clearly not realize the meaning of the item and overestimated their competence. At the end of the course there is awareness of the complexity of the item. This consciousness will help students for further IL- training and motivate them to become more confident in the specific skill by more practice and self-study.
3. Finally, the questionnaire proposed questions related to advanced IL-competences. For these items, the SE was low and stayed low. It can be hypothesized that the confrontation of the student with his own perceptions of competence, will work as a trigger. This can be helpful in further IL-development.

From our data it can be concluded that repeated SE-tests are a useful educational tool in the acquisition of IL. Especially the post-course SE-assessment reflects a realistic measure for the degree of IL attained by the student. SE-tests enhance a critical attitude of the student and therefore could motivate the student for autonomous lifelong learning.