This document summarizes the experience of delivering information literacy training to large undergraduate classes at Dublin City University. Over time, the library refined its approach, focusing training on freshman classes and embedding sessions within core business modules. This improved attendance rates and led to the development of a new hybrid training model combining in-person lectures, self-directed online learning, hands-on sessions, and online assessment through the virtual learning environment. Evaluation found this approach successfully delivered essential information literacy skills while balancing face-to-face and online components.

1. Successfully training large undergraduate
classes: the experience at Dublin City
University
David Meehan
DCU Library
BBSLG Conference
1 July 2009
IMI

2. Analysing the management of large
classes

3. Some themes
• Experience of IL delivery
• Role of liaison
• Re-appraisal of IL delivery
• Programme content
• Assessment of ‘new approach’

4. Early days: 2002-03
Potential Business School market:
• 500+ new UG students per year
• 5 programmes (2 large, 3 medium)
Main actors:
• Programme chairs (for each year)
• Module co-ordinators

5. Early days: 2002-03
Training offered:
• To two years of each programme
• To a total of 1,050 students
• Mostly standalone
• Sessions generally 1 hour long
– 2-hour session offered to 2 large classes

6. Early days: 2002-03
Outcome:
• Average turnout: 45%
– Big variations within this figure
• Turnout for ‘freshers’: 39%!
• Judgement on early approach:
– Ambitious, but overextended

7. Emergence of a target market:
2003-04
Definite need to focus. Offer reduced to:
• two large programmes; and
• one medium sized programme
IL for one large programme embedded in a
new ‘Skills for Success’ module:
• 1-hour session divided into four groups
• Online assessment through VLE

8. Emergence of a target market:
2003-04
• Overall turnout:
– No improvement!
• Emergence (through two programmes) of
core target market of ‘freshers’:
– Turnout for both fresher classes: 51%
– In the ‘SfS’ module: 78%!

9. So you thought you had it cracked!:
2004-06
• Focused on fresher training through ‘SfS’:
– But turnout rates down to 50-60%
• Nevertheless, definite advances being
made in course organisation:
– But some operational problems evident,
especially annual change of module
coordinator

10. Review in summer 2006
• Liaised with originator of module:
– Queried suitability of ‘SfS’ to deliver IL?
• Observations:
– ‘SfS’ worked for target market
– ‘SfS’ to be refitted at programme level
– Clearer link with module coordinator
– Maintain Library structure of IL delivery
– Monitor turnout

11. Payback!
• ‘SfS’ attendance from 2006-07:
– Class surpassed 200 students!
– Attendance stabilised around 90%
• But behind the figures:
– 2006-07 returns indicated we were already at
capacity!
– Confirmed in 2007-08

12. Review in summer 2008
• Evaluated constraints…
– Limited timetable options; limited capacity
(Library training rooms & staff)
• … and resources:
– Library facilities; online resources; LETS (our
e-tutorial); lecture theatre; excellent liaison
• Re-evaluated essential student needs
• Developed new programme

13. New information literacy programme
for business ‘freshers’

14. Aims
• To provide a richer student experience,
but not at expense of face-time
• To keep features which worked in past
• To use available technologies to engage
and assess students
• To ‘future-proof’ our IL offer

15. The programme
• Lecture theatre (whole class) 30 minutes
– Intro to overall IL programme, i.e.
– General business resources; catalogue; LETS; quiz
• Self-directed learning using LETS
– Envisaged to corroborate lecture theatre session and
prepare for hands-on session
• Hands-on session in Library (30 mins / group)
– Demonstration of e-journals database
– Quick exercise
• Quiz though VLE (5% of module marks)

16. Appraisal of new programme
• No major change in turnout (still high) or
quiz scores (still high)
• It seems to be a sustainable model for
larger student numbers
• Emerging hybrid model of training and
assessment
• Potential to add new elements/features
– Plagiarism; Citing and referencing

17. Delivering successfully?
• Yes, according to:
– Student turnout
– Student feedback (assessment marks,
engagement at sessions)
– Lecturer feedback

18. Delivering successfully?
• Own (subjective) evaluation? Yes,
according to:
– Preferred maintenance of substantial face-to-
face and hands-on elements
– Already realised and potential future use of
online elements (VLEs, e-tutorials, video
guides, social networking)
– Flexible? Striking the right balance:
• hybrid, or a greater bias towards online?
– Sustainability of approach