Presentation on theme: "GABRIELA SONNTAG CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY SAN MARCOS LAC 2008 Measuring student information literacy learning outcomes."— Presentation transcript:
GABRIELA SONNTAG CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY SAN MARCOS LAC 2008 Measuring student information literacy learning outcomes
“the unanimous conclusion from the testing done and from personal observation is that most students are seriously lacking in knowledge and ability to use books and libraries effectively.” Felix Snider (1974)
Kellogg library at the California State University in San Marcos CSUSM facts: Undergraduates 8,577 Graduates 582 Full-time Faculty 187 Bachelor’s Degrees 27 Master’s Degrees 10 Top degrees: business, biology, communication, psychology, kinesiology, human development, pre-nursing, sociology. CSU system: 23 campuses, 450,000+ students, 47,000 faculty and staff.
Three assessments iSkills GE Annual Assess- ments
GEL Pre/Post Scores
GEO Pre/Post Scores
Three assessments iSkills GE Annual Assessm ents
“…discussing assessment methods collaboratively is a very productive exercise in planning a systematic, comprehensive information literacy program. This assessment program …..should make explicit to the institution’s constituencies how information literacy contributes to producing educated students and citizens.” (Information Literacy Competency Standards, p. 6)
General Education Cycle 1: Written Communication and Information Literacy Rounds: each semester select an Area to focus on: several classes in each Area, several sections of each class: Round 1: (GE Writing) and (Critical Thinking) Round 2: (Quant Reasoning) and (US History) Round 3: (Social sciences)
The Assessments Cycle 1 Rounds:#Faculty participants #Different courses represented* #Pieces of student writing assessed Round Round Round Total48 19 *multiple sections of the courses were assessed 1796
Information Literacy Finding appropriate sources: Students can locate appropriate references for their papers and assignments. Using sources: Students interpret and use the information found in their paper and assignments.
Results Student Learning Outcome Meeting minimum Rated superior Thesis86.9%20.0% Organization86.0%21.1% Mechanics86.2%20.9% Finding sources86.5%25.5% Using sources82.9%20.1%
iSkills Using Information Data
Three assessments iSkills GE Annual Assessm ents
Annual Assessments and Program Reviews Required self-study includes assessment of Programmatic Student Learning Outcomes. Includes annual assessment findings – benchmarking, changes, evidence of impact. Plans for next cycle of assessment studies.
IL Assessment Programmatic Student Learning Outcomes are Standards for Information Literacy (ACRL). Annual assessments are embedded. Measured student knowledge of characteristics of scholarly information sources (Evaluate).
Results #Different courses represented* # Student participants Fall7471 Spring17776 Total *multiple sections of the courses were assessed
Scores by year
Deeper study Degree#core courses #cores with IL #courses with IL Biology739 Comm.646 History118 H Develop.540 Kinesiology1610 Lit/Writing829 Pol. Science649 Psychology6110 Sociology6310
Mean Scores by Course
Mean Scores by Major
Class score cross tabulation FailingAdequateExcellentTotal Freshmen Count Percent w/n class % % % % Sophomore Count Percent w/n class % % % % Junior Count Percent w/n class % % % % Senior Count Percent w/n class % % % % Total Count Percent w/n class % % % %
History Learning Outcome measured: “ incorporate new digital and multimedia formats into the practice and presentation of history” specifically “questions about what issues are raised in using the Internet for research…” Conclusion: “we should address this issue in more detail than we do….discussing not just how one can judge reliability of a source but also how to sift through even the most reliable sources [for evidence]….”
Political Science Learning Outcomes measured: “Demonstrate working knowledge of research methods” Pre-test score of 9.8 -weakness in formulating research questions, sampling, drawing conclusions. Post-test score of general improvement but especially in formulating research questions, hypotheses, and identifying appropriate research methodology.
Psychology Learning outcomes measured: Information Literacy Faculty survey on student IL abilities : 57% reported students find it difficult to locate sources. 45.3% students need help with evaluating sources 26.4% students lack synthesis skills (using information) General Education Assessment
Results: Superior Rating Student Learning Outcome PsychologyAll GE Thesis31.5%20.0% Organization35.6%21.1% Mechanics32.4%20.9% Finding sources39.9%25.5% Using sources30.5%20.1%
Sociology Learning Outcome measured: Write a literature review and research report. Assessed research papers in capstone seminar. Interviewed faculty teaching course. Locate: 81.5% Understand: 39.5% Summarize/Synthesize (USING): 36.8% Mechanics: 36.8%
Conclusions Need for multiple measures. Need for collaboration with academic departments. Strive for improvement.
Future Goals Year 2 measure Define. Engage the university community in dialog on teaching, learning, and information literacy. Look to departmental assessments and program reviews for inclusion of IL.