nercomp 2009 presentation

8/14/2019 Nercomp 2009 Presentation

1/24

Web 2.0 for Information Literacy:Using wikis for research, collaboration,

critical thinking, and knowledge building

Jay Fogleman, Instructor, School of Education

Mona Anne Niedbala, Education & Curriculum Materials Librarian


2/24

Acknowledgments

Dr. David Byrd, Director, School of Education

David Maslyn, Dean, University LibrariesDavid Porter, Director, Media & Technology Services

Mary Jane Palm, Manager, Instructional Technologies &

Media Services

Julie Coiro, Professor, URI School of Education

URI School of Education Faculty Members


3/24

Overview

Problem statement

Approach

Context

Methods

Results

Conclusions


4/24

Problem: Student Research & Writing

In the context of a freshman-level introductory

course in Education, our students struggle to:

1. Identify high quality information sources2. Synthesize data in their writing

3. Write a technical paper

How can we use students' online acumen tostrengthen their ability to use university resources to

research, synthesize, and write about a local

educational context?


5/24

Our Approach: Provide Supports

Organize student writing in a class wiki

Provide library instruction*

Provide online research tutorialsInclude a peer-editing cycle*


6/24

Theoretical FrameACRL Information Literacy Competency Standards:

The information literate student :

1. Standard 1: determines the nature of information needed

2. Standard 2: accesses information efficiently

3. Standard 3: evaluates information4. Standard 4: uses information effectively

5. Standard 5: understands economic, social, legal issues

Scaffolding (Vygotsky, 1978)

Writing to Learn (Emig, 1977)

Knowledge Building (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1992)


7/24

StrategiesClass wiki

Organize all assignment information, resources, and student work in a wiki

Library Instruction:

1. Graphic describing the role of library sessions in the project process

2. Modeling data collection

3. Modeling statement writing

4. Engaging students in data collection and statement writing

Online Scaffolds:

Online research tutorials

Peer-review Cycle

1. Provide assessment rubric2. Have students who opt to work in triads provide each other feedback

3. Provide opportunity for students to recognize efforts of their editors


8/24

Context: Curriculum Materials Library

Mission

CollectionTechnology


9/24

Curriculum Materials Library


10/24



11/24



12/24

Context: Introduction to Education

28 Students

25 Freshmen

15 Education majors


13/24

Context: Faculty/Librarian Partnership

Bi-weekly face-to-

face meetings prior

to project for library

session design Exchange of emails

for finalizing library

scaffolds

Analysis andevaluation of library

sessions


14/24

Class Wiki


15/24

Library instruction Research process


16/24

Library instruction using data

Write

Synthesize (In-class samples)

Represent (Suggestdata tables)

Locate(Model search)

Interactive scaffolds


17/24

Peer Editing Cycle

Encourage students

to read others work

Support triad editorswith rubric template,

time

Provide opportunity torecognize helpful

editors

Draft

Assess

Revise
https://uriteacherknowledge.wikispaces.com/F08+CR+EVAL+RUBRIC+PREVIEWhttps://uriteacherknowledge.wikispaces.com/F08+CR+EVAL+RUBRIC+PREVIEW


18/24

Data

Support Description Assessment ACRL Standards

Library instruction Three library classes

focusing on different

phases of the research

Student artifacts

Student feedback

survey

Standard 1: 1.1

Standard 2: 2.5

Standard 3: 3.3

Standard 4: 4.1

Standard 5: 5.3

Online researchscaffolds

Step-by-step researchtutorials included in the

class wiki

Student feedbacksurvey

Standard 1: 1.1Standard 2: 2.5

Standard 3: 3.3

Peer-editing cycle Time period during project

where students edited each

others drafts using a rubric

Student papers

Student feedback

survey

Standard 3: 3.3

Standard 4: 4.1

Standard 5: 5.3

Class wiki Private, editable websitewhere students were able

to publish their work and

view the work of others

Page edits per studentPage visits per student

Student feedback

survey

Standard 2: 2.5Standard 3: 3.3

Standard 4: 4.1

Standard 5: 5.3


19/24

AnalysisSupport Description Assessment Information

literacy

outcomes

Library Instruction Income/Poverty datatables and

statement example

Race/Ethnicity data

tables andstatement example

Student artifacts

Student feedback survey

Collect additional data

and create synthesis

statements Use data tables for

studying the impact of

community data oneducational issues

Use wiki features for data

collection and working

within the final project

Peer-editing cycle Time period during projectwhere students worked in

triads to edit each othersdrafts by offering feedback

and using a rubric to

estimate report score.

Student reports Student feedback

survey

Use wiki features to

evaluate peer work

Evaluate peer reportagainst research goals

Evaluate peer report

content organization Evaluate ethical use of

information


20/24

Results: Library InstructionLibrary Instruction Usage Average Report

Score (%)

High Participation: Three or more

data tables integrated in the

report

75% 77 %

Low Participation: Less than

three tables/some data integrated

in the report

25% 55 %


21/24

Results: Peer-editing CyclePeer Editing Cycle Usage Average Report

Score (%)

High Participation: Edited a peers

paper and received feedback from

another student

61% 81 %

Low Participation: Did not give or

receive peer feedback

39% 75 %


22/24

Discussion/Conclusion

Students who took advantage of the available

supports tended to produce more complete

context reports . What about others?

By the end of the project, students saw the

value of the various support strategies

Faculty working in partnership with librarianscan support research by novice students


23/24

Implications

Learning theories such as social constructivism

(Knowledge Building) and constructivism (Writing to

Learn) can inform the use of new online tools with

students

New online technologies such as Web 2.0 tools

provide opportunities to develop new teaching

approaches and support strategies that buildstudents information literacy


24/24

What did you think?

Your input is important to us!

Click on Evaluate This Session on theMid-Atlantic Regional program page.

nercomp 2009 presentation

Documents