Assessing information literacy in first year writing

2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 102136
Author(s):  
Kevin W. Walker ◽  
Sara Maurice Whitver
Keyword(s):  
Information Literacy ◽  
First Year ◽  
First Year Writing

scholarly journals My life as a writing professor and research librarian: The ideas that bridge the gap

2020 ◽  
Vol 81 (1) ◽  
pp. 38
Author(s):  
George Koors
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Information Literacy ◽  
First Year ◽  
College Level ◽  
First Year Writing ◽  
American University ◽  
Writing Courses ◽  
Large Group ◽  
Time To Learn ◽  
Over Time

When I got into libraries, I looked forward to more one-on-one time with students. I had been a teacher at the college level for some time, and when I got a job as reference coordinator at American University, I saw an opportunity to have both large-group and one-on-one time with students.I staff a public-facing research desk, am embedded in first-year writing courses as their librarian, and teach first-year writing as a professor in the literature department. It is a wonderful balance, but it has taken time to learn how these identities interact. Over time, they have merged. This essay looks at that, and at some of the language I have used to understand that bridge between these roles. I hope to lightly tie this language to aspects of the ACRL Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education.

Crowdsourcing the curriculum

2014 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 277-292 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jamie White-Farnham ◽  
Carolyn Caffrey Gardner
Keyword(s):  
Student Performance ◽  
Information Literacy ◽  
First Year ◽  
Writing Program ◽  
First Year Writing ◽  
Writing Assignments ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Literacy Outcomes ◽  
Writing Program Administrator ◽  
Writing Instructors

Purpose – The purpose of this article is to describe the rationale, process and results of an integrated curricular intervention for information literacy instruction in a first-year writing program. Design/methodology/approach – The information literacy coordinator collaborated with writing instructors and the Writing Program Administrator on the initial design of information literacy outcomes. The librarian and instructors created a modular curriculum with multiple lessons and activities aligned to each outcome. The curriculum was housed in the course management system for easy updating and distribution. Finally, instructors taught the embedded information literacy activities for two semesters and measured student improvement through a pre-/post-survey and a rubric-based assessment of students’ citation and documentation. Findings – Students saw significant gains over the course of the semester in their ability to use Boolean operators, identify the purpose of sources and understand citation styles. As a related and valuable measure, writing program assessment results showed an improvement in students’ performance in citation and documentation in researched writing assignments after a one-year implementation of the intervention. Writing instructors reported an increased awareness of information literacy pedagogy and intentionality in their teaching. Finally, the librarian was able to leverage this collaboration to highlight the teaching roles of librarians beyond the one-shot. Originality/value – Well-known temporal and logistical limits exist in regard to embedded, one-shot and multi-shot approaches to information literacy. The latter two are especially unsustainable when implemented at scale, such as within a first-year writing program that serves hundreds or thousands of students each semester. This study documents a faculty development approach in which writing instructors integrate information literacy (IL) into their own instruction. This offers a model that makes explicit IL processes and skills to writing instructors, results in high student performance and allows especially the small college librarian to manage his/her other strategic information literacy partnerships.

scholarly journals “She Has a Vocabulary I Just Don’t Have”: Faculty Culture and Information Literacy Collaboration

2013 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 235-242
Author(s):  
Carolyn Caffrey Gardner ◽  
Jamie White-Farnham
Keyword(s):  
Information Literacy ◽  
Literacy Instruction ◽  
First Year ◽  
Writing Program ◽  
Faculty Culture ◽  
First Year Writing ◽  
Information Literacy Instruction

The authors describe difficulties pertaining to discipline-specific discourse and identity among collaborators during the process of revising the information literacy component of a first-year writing program. Hardesty’s term “faculty culture” offers a frame through which to understand resistance and tension among otherwise engaged faculty and situates this experience within the uncomfortable history between faculty and librarians who may be perceived as “inauthentic” faculty. The authors suggest ways to improve communication between librarians and writing program faculty when collaborating on information literacy instruction.

Framing first-year writing course guides: a content analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 500-512 ◽  
Author(s):  
Glenda M. Insua
Keyword(s):  
Information Literacy ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
First Year ◽  
First Year Writing ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Research Libraries ◽  
Instructional Content ◽  
Writing Course ◽  
American Research ◽  
Practical Implications

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to determine the extent to which first-year writing course guides contain instructional content and whether the ACRL Framework for information literacy has been addressed in these guides.Design/methodology/approachFirst-year writing course guides were identified from American Research Libraries websites and examined for instructional elements. These elements were categorized using a rubric that mapped the Framework to instructional content. Qualtrics was used to organize and analyze the data.FindingsMost first-year writing course guides include instructional content, but less than half incorporate the Framework in some way. Guides that do incorporate the Framework focus on “searching as strategic exploration” and “research as inquiry”.Practical implicationsThis paper provides librarians with practical information on first-year writing guides and includes examples of how the Framework might be addressed.Originality/valueThis study contributes to the literature on research guide content and is the first to invent first-year writing course guides.

scholarly journals Credit Where Credit is Due: Considering Ethics, Ethos, and Process in Library Instruction on Attribution

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin R. Harris
Keyword(s):  
Information Literacy ◽  
Research Process ◽  
First Year ◽  
Library Instruction ◽  
Educational Mission ◽  
First Year Writing ◽  
Writing Courses ◽  
Literacy Initiatives ◽  
Changing Roles ◽  
Effective Use

Numerous reasons have been offered for the increase in plagiarism in the academy over the last decade, and most of the research has assigned primary blame to the influence of the Internet. Few writers have considered how changes in the location of research and citation instruction have had an impact on these statistics. The lack of such instruction in first year writing courses, spurred by changes in pedagogical theory on the teaching of composition, has been a powerful but subtle influence on how (or even if) research process is truly taught to undergraduates. Further, as librarians have adopted and deployed information literacy initiatives in their institutions, their responsibilities related to the ethical and effective use of sources have grown. Considering options for instructing students “how” and “why” they will want to use sources will help teaching librarians achieve their information literacy initiatives and prepare for the new and changing roles they will accept in their institution’s educational mission. 

Integrated Information Literacy and Student Outcomes in Foundational First-Year Writing

2013 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 106
Author(s):  
Jennifer Fielding ◽  
Julia Hans ◽  
Frank Mabee ◽  
Kisha Tracy ◽  
Annamary Consalvo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Information Literacy ◽  
Student Outcomes ◽  
First Year ◽  
First Year Writing ◽  
Integrated Information

scholarly journals The Librarian, the Machine, or a Little of Both: A Comparative Study of Three Information Literacy Pedagogies at Oakland University

2007 ◽  
Vol 68 (4) ◽  
pp. 330-342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth W. Kraemer ◽  
Shawn V. Lombardo ◽  
Frank J. Lepkowski
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Student Performance ◽  
Information Literacy ◽  
Instructional Methods ◽  
First Year ◽  
First Year Writing ◽  
Hybrid Combination ◽  
Online Tutorials ◽  
Writing Course ◽  
Live Instruction

Each year, Oakland library faculty provide information literacy instruction for Rhetoric 160, a first-year writing course, through a combination of WebCT-based online tutorials and in-class teaching. For this study, twelve sections of RHT 160 during the winter 2005 term were selected to compare three instructional methods: online instruction only, live instruction, and the current “hybrid” combination of live instruction and online tutorials. The sections were assigned to one of the instructional methods and, to assess student learning, all students (n=224) completed identical pre- and post-tests. Results of the study, including differences in student performance in relation to pedagogy, are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document