Abstracts
Abstract
After creating an online information literacy tutorial in response to the shift to online learning due to the COVID-19 pandemic, a team of six library employees developed a multi-pronged approach to assessing the module to determine how well it met the stated learning objectives. This article describes the assessment of the Getting Started With Research information literacy module, a learning experience developed using Articulate Rise 360 software and accompanied by a Google Forms research log for students to complete. The authors present results from both a rubric-driven and textual analysis study undertaken to assess student responses to the research logs, and they discuss how the study’s findings will inform future practice.
Keywords:
- Online tutorial,
- rubric analysis,
- asynchronous instruction,
- active learning,
- textual analysis
Résumé
Après avoir créé un tutoriel en ligne sur la maîtrise de l’information en réponse au passage à l’apprentissage en ligne dû à la pandémie de la COVID-19, une équipe de six employés de la bibliothèque ont développé une approche multidimensionnelle pour évaluer le module afin de déterminer dans quelle mesure il répondait aux objectifs d’apprentissage énoncés. Cet article décrit l’évaluation du module de la maîtrise de l’information « Getting Started With Research », une expérience d’apprentissage conçue en utilisant le logiciel Articulate Rise 360 et accompagnée d’un carnet de recherche Google Forms à remplir par les étudiants. Les autrices présentent les résultats d’une étude axée sur une rubrique et une analyse textuelle entreprise pour évaluer les réponses des étudiants aux carnets de recherche et ils discutent de la manière dont les résultats de l’étude éclaireront les pratiques futures.
Mots-clés :
- Tutoriel en ligne,
- analyse par rubrique,
- formation asynchrone,
- apprentissage actif,
- analyse textuelle
Download the article in PDF to read it.
Download
Appendices
Bibliography
- Badia, G. (2019). Holistic or analytic rubrics? Grading information literacy instruction. College & Undergraduate Libraries, 26(2), 109–116.
- Fluk, L. R. (2015). Foregrounding the research log in information literacy instruction. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 41(4), 488–498.
- Furey, E. (2023). Calculator soup - online calculators.
- Gibbs, D., Boettcher, J., Hollingsworth, J., & Slania, H. (2012). Assessing the research needs of graduate students at Georgetown University. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 38(5), 268–276.
- Gonzales, J. (2014, May 1). Know your terms: Holistic, analytic, and single-point rubrics. Cult of Pedagogy.
- Gonzalez, J. (2015, February 4). Meet the single point rubric. Cult of Pedagogy.
- Goodsett, M. (2020). Best practices for teaching and assessing critical thinking in information literacy online learning objects. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 46(5), 1-7.
- Harding, J., & Shepard, R. (2020). The lifecycle of a research tutorial: From concept to implementation and beyond. Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship, 32(1), 29–35.
- Insua, G. M., Lantz, C., & Armstrong, A. (2018). In their own words: Using first-year student research journals to guide information literacy instruction. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 18(1), 141–161.
- Koelling, G., & Russo, A. (2021). Teaching assistants’ research assignments and information literacy. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 21(4), 773–795.
- Lierman, A., & Santiago, A. (2019). Developing online instruction according to best practices. Journal of Information Literacy, 13(2), 206–221.
- Markowski, B., McCartin, L., & Evers, S. (2018). Meeting students where they are: Using rubric-based assessment to modify an information literacy curriculum.Communications in Information Literacy, 12(2), 128–149.
- Matlin, T. R., & Lantzy, T. (2017). Maintaining quality while expanding our reach: Using online information literacy tutorials in the sciences and health sciences. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 12(3), 95–113.
- Paulson, E., & Laverty, C. (2018). Leveraging learning outcomes to build an online information literacy tool. Journal of Library & Information Services in Distance Learning, 12(1–2), 35–48.
- Qualtrics. (2023, April 12). Sample size calculator. Market Research.
- Schilperoort, H. M. (2020). Self-paced tutorials to support evidence-based practice and information literacy in online health sciences education. Journal of Library & Information Services in Distance Learning, 14(3–4), 278–290.
- Schweikhard, A. J., Hoberecht, T., Peterson, A., & Randall, K. (2018). The impact of library tutorials on the information literacy skills of occupational therapy and physical therapy students in an evidence-based practice course: A rubric assessment. Medical Reference Services Quarterly, 37(1), 43–59.
- Stemler, S. (2001). An overview of content analysis. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 7, 1-6.
- Stiwinter, K. (2013). Using an interactive online tutorial to expand library instruction. Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 18(1), 15–41.
- Thompson, L., & Carrier, H. S. (2016). Scalable equals asynchronous and asynchronous equals boring. Or does it? Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 21(3–4), 81–92.
- Tronstad, B., Phillips, L., Garcia, J., & Harlow, M. A. (2009). Assessing the TIP online information literacy tutorial. Reference Services Review, 37(1), 54–64.