Presented at LILAC 2016

2. Themes
• Why assess Information Literacy?
• How to create a portable re-usable assessment
• How assessment can critically inform your teaching

3. The context

4. Why assess information literacy?
• Buy in from new departments key to
embedding IL
• IL programme mapped to module
learning outcomes / Engineering
Council accreditation
• Demonstrating importance of IL
learning outcomes to programmes

5. Engineering Council (2011). The accreditation of Higher Education
programmes: UK standard for professional engineering competence. London,
United Kingdom: Author.

6. Why assess Information Literacy?
The challenges of teaching IL to STEM students!
© Matthew Stinson. Uploaded on October 24 2005
(CC BY-NC 2.0) https://www.flickr.com
©Oliver Tacke. Taken on February 19, 2014, (CC BY 2.0)
https://www.flickr.com
Image courtesy of khunaspix at
FreeDigitalPhotos.net

7. How to create a portable re-usable
assessment – the context
• Professional Skills for Science
& Engineering identified for
Level 4 IL input
• Content and planning for the
module needed fast!
• Opportunity to shape delivery
Image courtesy of Stuart Miles at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

8. Professional skills for Scientists &
Engineers
Short fat module teaching a range of core skills
4 sessions delivered: Information Sources, Knovel, Using the free web, referencing
©Shaun Fisher Test Tubes, Sept 4 2014, (CC BY 2.0) https://www.flickr.com
©IBM Research. Sunflower Receiver CAD, Sept 16 2014, (CC BY-ND 2.0) https://www.flickr.com
©Ewa Rozkosz, Information Literacy, Aug 2 2011, (CC BY-SA 2.0) https://www.flickr.com

9. How to create a portable re-usable
assessment – the mechanics
• Explicitly linked to faculty assessment criteria
• Can migrate into existing assessment without change
• Can be marked separately (by library staff)
• Thematically linked to subject area but focused exclusively
on cross-disciplinary skills
• For Professional Skills, IL assessment thematically linked to
lab report assessment

10. Source identification
Search strategy
Identifying appropriate
search source
Source evaluation
Referencing

12. Analysis of engineers’ results 14/15
Comparable attainment = robustness of assessment?
• Any students who failed the IL component also failed host
assessment
67% 29%
4%
33%
Marking comparison to host
assessment Same grade
category
Different grade
category (< 10%)
Different grade
category
(between 10 and
12%)

13. Critically informing teaching
• More interesting was deeper reflection on work produced
• Analysis of scripts identified areas where teaching could
be changed to improve understanding:
• How taught sessions are sequenced
• What content is delivered
• How content is thematically linked

14. Critically informing teaching
• Greater focus now placed on
contextualising use of the free
web:
• How it relates to library resources
• The importance of appropriate
depth as well as provenance
©Blue Valley West Library. Taken on February 2, 2014. (CC BY-SA
2.0) . https://www.flickr.com

15. Next steps
• 2nd year - migration into a new
assessment (industrial portfolio)
• Marking complete as of Feb 2016
for 2nd roll-out
• Analysis comparing attainment to
attendance
• Planned roll-out to further subjects
2016/17
Image courtesy of Stuart Miles at FreeDigitalPhotos.net