scholarly journals A Novel Assessment Tool for Quantitative Evaluation of Science Literature Search Performance: Application to First-Year and Senior Undergraduate Biology Majors

2017 ◽  
Vol 77 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason M. Blank ◽  
Karen J. McGaughey ◽  
Elena L. Keeling ◽  
Kristen L. Thorp ◽  
Conor C. Shannon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Information Literacy ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
First Year ◽  
Search Performance ◽  
Science Literature ◽  
Science Students ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Literature Searching ◽  
Biology Majors

Expertise in searching and evaluating scientific literature is a requisite skill of trained scientists and science students, yet information literacy instruction varies greatly among institutions and programs. To ensure that science students acquire information literacy skills, robust methods of assessment are needed. Here, we describe a novel tool for longitudinal, crossover assessment of literature-searching skills in science students and apply it to a cross-sectional assessment of literature-searching performance in 145 first-year and 43 senior biology majors. Subjects were given an open-ended prompt requiring them to find multiple sources of information addressing a particular scientific topic. A blinded scorer used a rubric to score the resources identified by the subjects and generate numerical scores for source quality, source relevance, and citation quality. Two versions of the assessment prompt were given to facilitate eventual longitudinal study of individual students in a crossover design. Seniors were significantly more likely to find relevant, peer-reviewed journal articles, provide appropriate citations, and provide correct answers to other questions about scientific literature. This assessment tool accommodates large numbers of students and can be modified easily for use in other disciplines or at other levels of education.

scholarly journals A Novel Assessment Tool for Quantitative Evaluation of Science Literature Search Performance: Application to First-Year and Senior Undergraduate Biology Majors

2016 ◽  
Vol 77 (6) ◽  
pp. 682-702 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. M. Blank ◽  
K. J. McGaughey ◽  
E. L. Keeling ◽  
K. L. Thorp ◽  
C. C. Shannon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quantitative Evaluation ◽  
Literature Search ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
First Year ◽  
Search Performance ◽  
Science Literature ◽  
Undergraduate Biology ◽  
Biology Majors

Perceptions and Applications of Information Literacy by First Year Applied Science Students

2009 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 159-171 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janelle Wilkes ◽  
Lisa J. Gurney
Keyword(s):  
Information Literacy ◽  
Applied Science ◽  
First Year ◽  
Science Students

scholarly journals Integration of Information and Scientific Literacy: Promoting Literacy in Undergraduates

2010 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 536-542 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason A. Porter ◽  
Kevin C. Wolbach ◽  
Catherine B. Purzycki ◽  
Leslie A. Bowman ◽  
Eva Agbada ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Biological Sciences ◽  
Information Literacy ◽  
Scientific Literacy ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
First Year ◽  
Student Responses ◽  
Research Libraries ◽  
Academic Advancement ◽  
Undergraduate Experience

The Association of College and Research Libraries recommends incorporating information literacy (IL) skills across university and college curricula, for the goal of developing information literate graduates. Congruent with this goal, the Departments of Biological Sciences and Information Science developed an integrated IL and scientific literacy (SL) exercise for use in a first-year biology course. Students were provided the opportunity to access, retrieve, analyze, and evaluate primary scientific literature. By the completion of this project, student responses improved concerning knowledge and relevance of IL and SL skills. This project exposes students to IL and SL early in their undergraduate experience, preparing them for future academic advancement.

scholarly journals Source discernment – the root of all information literacy?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Unger ◽  
Magdalena Svanberg ◽  
Miritt Zisser
Keyword(s):  
Information Literacy ◽  
Academic Writing ◽  
Evaluation Process ◽  
Popular Science ◽  
White Paper ◽  
First Year ◽  
Academic Experience ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
First Year Student

Is source discernment at the root of all information literacy? In today’s media landscape, finding information is easy. Finding information that is scientifically correct and trustworthy is much more difficult. An added problem for students today is that all this available information come in similar formats. When all information is presented as a pdf on your screen, how do you know what you ́re reading? How is a first year student with no previous academic experience really supposed to discern between a scholarly article, a book chapter, a conference article, a white paper, a popular science article, a scientific report and a doctoral thesis? And yet the ability to do so is fundamental for the information evaluation process. If you are not sure what you are reading, how can you evaluate the quality of the information? To ease our students’way into academic writing we now start our information literacy teaching with identifying different sources of information. Reference writing and information searching are then taught from this angle. Student assignments and feedback from teachers show that this seems to improve the quality of the sources the students use in their work as well as their ability to write correct references. We would like to discuss this with colleagues from other universities with similar or other experiences. The questions we would like to focus on are: How a first year student with no previous academic experience is really supposed to discern between different types of scholarly and non-scholarly information materials and how we as library instructors can help our students with this? What are the experience of other librarians and are there any good examples of strategies or classroom exercises?

scholarly journals First Year University Students Arrive with Some Search Skills, But Struggle with Scholarly Sources

2014 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 22
Author(s):  
Cari Merkley
Keyword(s):  
Information Literacy ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Tertiary Education ◽  
Information Source ◽  
Health Sciences ◽  
Literacy Skills ◽  
First Year ◽  
First Year Students ◽  
Scholarly Literature ◽  
Information Literacy Skills

A Review of: Salisbury, F., & Karasmanis, S. (2011). Are they ready? Exploring student information literacy skills in the transition from secondary to tertiary education. Australian Academic & Research Libraries, 42(1), 43-58. Objective – To determine what existing information literacy skills first year students possess upon entering university. Design – Quantitative survey questionnaire. Setting – A research university in Australia. Subjects – 1,029 first year students in the health sciences. Methods – First year students enrolled in the health sciences were asked to complete a paper questionnaire in their first week of classes in 2009. The 20 question survey was distributed in student tutorial groups. The first 10 questions collected information on student demographics, expected library use, and existing information seeking behaviour. The remaining 10 questions tested students’ understanding of information literacy concepts. Data collected from the survey were analyzed using the statistical software SPSS. Main Results – Most of the students who responded to the questionnaire were between the ages of 16 and 21 (84.3%) with only 2.2% over the age of 40. Approximately 15% of respondents had completed some postsecondary university or vocational education prior to enrolling in their current program. The students ranked Google, a friend, and a book as the top three places they would go to find information on something they knew little about. Google was also the most popular choice for finding a scholarly article (35% of respondents), followed by the library catalogue (21%). A large proportion of students correctly answered questions relating to identifying appropriate search terms. For example, one third of the students selected the correct combination of search concepts for a provided topic, and 77% identified that the choice of search phrase could negatively impact search results. Students also demonstrated prior knowledge of the Boolean operator AND, with 38% correctly identifying its use in the related question. Most students were also able to identify key markers of a website’s credibility. Questions relating to ethical information use and scholarly literature proved more challenging. Almost half (45%) of the students said that they did not know the characteristics of a peer reviewed journal article. Twenty five percent of respondents indicated that citing an information source was only necessary in the case of direct quotes, with only 28% correctly identifying the need for citing both quotes and paraphrasing. Only 23% were able to select the example of a journal citation from the list presented. Conclusion – Students enter university with existing strengths in concept identification and basic search formulation, but require the most assistance with locating and identifying scholarly literature and how to cite it appropriately in their work. The findings will inform the development of an online information literacy assessment tool to assist incoming students in identifying areas where they may require additional support as they transition to university.

scholarly journals What is the Best Way to Develop Information Literacy and Academic Skills of First Year Health Science Students? A Systematic Review

2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanne Munn ◽  
Jann Small
Keyword(s):  
Learning Outcomes ◽  
Information Literacy ◽  
Mode Of Delivery ◽  
Academic Skills ◽  
Health Science ◽  
First Year ◽  
Science Students ◽  
Health Science Students ◽  
Literacy Support ◽  
Integrated Or

Abstract Objective – This systematic review sought to identify evidence for best practice to support the development of information literacy and academic skills of first year undergraduate health science students. Methods – A range of electronic databases were searched and hand searches conducted. Initial results were screened using explicit inclusion and exclusion criteria to identify 53 relevant articles. Data on study design, student cohort, support strategy, and learning outcomes were extracted from each article. Quality of individual studies was considered and described narratively. Articles were classified and findings synthesized according to the mode of delivery of the intervention (Embedded, Integrated, or Adjunct) and classification of the study’s learning evaluation outcome (Organizational change, Behaviour, Learning, or Reaction). Results – Studies included in this review provide information on academic skills and information literacy support strategies offered to over 12,000 first year health science students. Courses targeted were varied but most commonly involved nursing, followed by psychology. Embedded strategies were adopted in 21 studies with Integrated and Adjunct strategies covered in 14 and 16 studies respectively. Across all modes of delivery, intervention formats included face-to-face, peer mentoring, online, and print based approaches, either solely or in combination. Most studies provided some outcomes at a level higher than student reaction to the intervention. Overall, irrespective of mode of delivery, positive learning outcomes were generally reported. Typically, findings of individual studies were confounded by the absence of suitable control groups, students self-selecting support and analysis of outcomes not accounting for these issues. As a result, there is very little unbiased, evaluative evidence for the best approach to supporting students. Nonetheless, our findings did identify poor student uptake of strategies when they are not interwoven into the curriculum, even when students were encouraged to attend on the basis that they had been identified at academic risk. Conclusions – The majority of studies included have reported positive learning outcomes following the implementation of academic skills and information literacy support strategies, irrespective of their mode of delivery (Embedded, Integrated, or Adjunct). Clear, rigorous evidence that embedded strategies offer superior learning outcomes compared to other delivery modes is lacking. However, because of poor student uptake of strategies offered outside curricula, embedded modes of academic and information literacy support are recommended for first year health science courses.

scholarly journals Source discernment

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Unger ◽  
Miritt Zisser
Keyword(s):  
Information Literacy ◽  
Evaluation Process ◽  
Popular Science ◽  
White Paper ◽  
First Year ◽  
Academic Experience ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Information Materials ◽  
First Year Student

Is source discernment at the root of all information literacy? In today’s media landscape, finding information is easy. Finding information that is scientifically correct and trustworthy is much more difficult. An added problem for students today is that all this available information come in similar formats. When all information is presented as a pdf on the screen, how do you know what you´re reading? How is a first year student with no previous academic experience really supposed to discern between a scholarly article, a book chapter, a conference article, a white paper, a popular science article, a scientific report and a doctoral thesis? And yet the ability to do so is fundamental for the information evaluation process. If you are not sure what you are reading, how are you supposed to be able to evaluate the quality of the information?   In 2019 we switched our approach to information literacy teaching to start with identifying different sources of information and then teach reference writing and information searching from this angle. Preliminary results from student assignments and feedback from teachers show that this seems to improve the quality of the sources the students use in their work as well as their ability to write correct references.   We would like to discuss this with colleagues from other universities with similar or other experiences. The questions we would like to focus on are:  How a first year student with no previous academic experience is really supposed to discern between different types of scholarly and non-scholarly information materials and how we as library instructors can help our students with this?  What are the experience of other librarians and are there any good examples of strategies or classroom exercises?

scholarly journals La web semántica y sus aplicaciones. Una unidad de aprendizaje en línea (UAL-OVA) necesaria en programas de alfabetización informacional en universidades

2010 ◽  
pp. a150
Author(s):  
Alejandro Uribe Tirado
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Management ◽  
Online Learning ◽  
Semantic Web ◽  
Information Literacy ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Literacy Programs ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Alfabetización Informacional ◽  
Different Sources ◽  
Information And Knowledge Management

La “Web Semántica” como un todo aún no es una realidad, aunque diferentes aplicaciones presentan importantes utilidades en lo académico y científico para una mejor gestión de información y del conocimiento, para la Alfabetización Informacional –ALFIN–. Desafortunadamente esa interrelación no se está dando, ni en la literatura científica, ni en las propuestas formativas, considerando el análisis realizado en diferentes fuentes de información y en más de 100 cursos-tutoriales. Por tanto, se propone un bosquejo de una “Unidad de Aprendizaje en Línea-UAL” a incluir en los programas de ALFIN en las universidades o en cursos curriculares relacionados con esta temática.The semantic web and its aplications. An online learning unit (OLU-LVO) necessary to information literacy programs at universitiesAbstractThe “Semantic Web” as a whole, not yet is a reality, although different applications present important utilities in academic and scientific, for one better information and knowledge management, for the Information Literacy –INFOLIT–. Unfortunately this interrelationship is not occurring either in the scientific literature or in formative proposals, considering the analysis on different sources of information and the 100 courses-tutorials. Therefore, proposes a sketch of an "Online Learning Unit –OLU– to include in INFOLIT programs at universities or curricular courses related to this thematic.

scholarly journals The Evolution of Information Literacy Outcomes in Interdisciplinary Undergraduate Science Courses

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melanie Gainey ◽  
Neelam Bharti ◽  
Matthew Marsteller ◽  
Huajin Wang ◽  
Sarah Young ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Information Literacy ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Literacy Learning ◽  
Learning Objectives ◽  
Learning Objective ◽  
First Year ◽  
Science Courses ◽  
Literacy Outcomes ◽  
Refinement Process ◽  
Undergraduate Science

The ACRL Framework for Information Literacy presents opportunities for moving beyond ‘one-shot’ information literacy sessions and creating a more scaffolded and embedded approach for instruction. We collaborated with faculty at Carnegie Mellon University to create Framework-inspired information literacy learning objectives for first-year and third-year science undergraduates and are continuously refining the objectives as the curriculum continues to evolve. This article describes our learning objective design and refinement process, challenges encountered, and ideas on how to create opportunities for embedding information literacy into a curriculum. We also share our full activity lesson plans and assessment tool.

Introducing Scientific Literature to Honors General Chemistry Students: Teaching Information Literacy and the Nature of Research to First-Year Chemistry Students

2015 ◽  
Vol 92 (4) ◽  
pp. 617-624 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ignacio J. Ferrer-Vinent ◽  
Margaret Bruehl ◽  
Denise Pan ◽  
Galin L. Jones
Keyword(s):  
General Chemistry ◽  
Information Literacy ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
First Year ◽  
Chemistry Students ◽  
Teaching Information
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document