Embedding information literacy into the curriculum - How do we know how well we are doing?

Katharine Reedy (Open University)

Cathie Jackson (Cardiff University)

Session content

• Setting the scene

• What are we aiming for?

• How do we measure provision?

• What are other people doing?

• Where do we go from here?

Setting the scene

• Information literacy becoming core component of learning and teaching in higher education

• University and library strategies adopting aim for IL to be integrated into taught courses

• Librarians working with academic colleagues to achieve this

What are we aiming for?

What are we aiming for?

• OU context– Moving from packaged study materials to

independent and lifelong learning skills– Challenge of IL for distance learners

• What we are trying to measure– IL skills in undergraduate and taught

postgraduate courses, guidelines provided by OU’s Centre for Outcomes Based Education

– Annual targets set by Library for number of new courses with embedded information literacy and % students doing courses with embedded IL

What are we aiming for?• Cardiff context

– Research-led– 18 libraries tailoring services to 28 Schools – Over 30 subject librarians with an IL role

• What are we trying to measure?– Progress towards University strategy action:

“to ensure IL skills are embedded within taught programmes of study”

– Information Services PI: “proportion of students provided with IL training embedded into the curriculum and to at least level C”

How do we measure provision?

• Progress logged in a database and reviewed regularly with OU senior management against annual targets set by Library for each Faculty– IL integrated or just recommended?– Integration / recommended use of IL planned,

in progress, or completed?– Level of IL and course learning outcomes?– Activities optional or assessed?

Provision of IL at OU 2005/6

• 48 courses with embedded IL – aiming for 70 by end 2006/7

• 5.7% students doing courses with integrated IL (=12,664 students across all faculties) – aiming for 35% by end 2006/7

• Small % because staff mainly only working on new courses – but large numbers of students being reached

IL in Social Work programme• Level 1 – Develop your skills in finding,

selecting and using information or data in defined contexts

• Level 2 – Find, critically evaluate and use information or data accurately in a range of contexts

• Level 3 – Find, critically evaluate and use information or data accurately in complex contexts

Social Work ProgrammeLevel 1 Level 2 Level 3

Indicator Develop your skills in finding, selecting and using information or data in defined contexts

Find, critically evaluate and use information or data accurately in a range of contexts

Find, critically evaluate and use information or data accurately in complex contexts

Learning Outcome

Be able to plan and carry out simple sample searches on a key social work database

Be able to apply techniques such as phrase searching and Boolean operators to different databases

Be able to plan and carry out outline searches for different types of information to support social care practice

Learning Activity

Students undertake sample searches on the in-house Law resource database and on Social Care Online

Students undertake searches using Boolean logic, truncation, phrase searching and wild cards to find information on a service user group of their choice

Students will undertake a practice related project which will involve a literature search and bibliography

Extending IL provision

• Work ongoing to map IL activities at different levels and share good practice (via Wiki) across Library subject teams

• This will inform more detailed Information Literacy Strategy with suggested activities at each level

• Aim to roll out IL to all courses over next 5 years

How do we measure provision?

• Data gathered through self-audit by subject librarians at Cardiff University– Categorised by levels derived from ACRL IL

competency standards– Clear definition of “embeddedness”

• Results displayed in graphical format for Information Services

• Report on overall progress to University

Provision of IL at Cardiff University 2005/6

Information Services was involved in providing:

• 93% of taught students with an introduction to the library

• 76% with training in accessing information through databases or the web

• 61% with IL training• 39% with IL training embedded into the

curriculum

What are other universities doing?

• OU carried out informal benchmarking survey of UK HE institutions via SCONUL list (end 2005)– Asked them to estimate % students for whom

IL integrated– 20 institutions replied, wide range of

responses, but all making progress with IL integration

Some examples• Bristol University audit of information

literacy teaching

• University of Sheffield Learning, Teaching & Assessment Strategy

• University of Southampton – student-centred learning a key part of Learning & Teaching Strategy

• Many other examples of innovation and good practice

Issues and challenges

• Difficulties of defining terms

• What to measure

• Methodology

• Tracking progress over whole degree programmes

• Differences between subject areas

• Partnerships – academic staff, library, and educational technologists

Where do we go from here?• Standardisation of terminology and

methodology needed

• What difference does embedding IL in the curriculum make?– SCONUL VAMP project looking at impact

measurement– More research on impact of provision needed

• End goal – the Information Literate University?

• Over to you!