8
T
his chapter will discuss areas that should be considered in information lit- eracy assessment but are not covered by the ACRL Standards. The na- ture of the relationship between students and faculty, students’ percep- tions of and attitudes about the standards, detailed demographic and background information on student populations with regard to information literacy, and stu- dents’ technological competencies are often overlooked in information literacy assessment. However, these areas are critical to the overall process in deter- mining students’ preparedness and information literacy exposure. Examples of assessment questions for these areas are also included in this chapter.Of the four areas addressed, students’ relationship with faculty is usually the most overlooked element in library-related instruction in general. Demo- graphics are almost always included in assessment, but the analysis of many of the components is usually descriptive and limited. Technological competence is critical in order for college-level students to participate and succeed in aca- demia and the workforce. The inclusion of questions in these areas is strongly recommended in order to enhance and improve your assessment endeavors.
ability to make relevance judgments revealed that the student’s relationship with the faculty is generally the most overlooked factor in library and informa- tion literacy assessment. “As a function of how students acquire information lit- eracy and library research skills and their attitudes about these skills, the stu- dent/faculty relationship is an important aspect at all levels of the academe.”1
Neely’s research confirmed that faculty generally “expect students at all levels to possess the research and information literacy skills in order to com- plete assignments and research projects and in doing so, structure class as- signments and coursework accordingly.”2However, research shows that stu- dents’ relationship with faculty indirectly affects the students’ performance (when tested on information literacy skills) and attitude (how they feel about information literacy skills). This is so because their relationship with faculty affects students’ exposure (to the library/information science environment) and their experience (within the library/information science environment).3 Simply put, faculty are key; students become exposed and experienced through their relationship with the faculty.
Although the ACRL Standards only mention the word instructor once throughout the entire document (see outcome 1.1.a), the importance of this aspect of information literacy cannot and should not be underestimated.
Additionally, the context of this mention in Standard 1 focuses on the student
“conferring with instructors” to define and articulate an information need.
Statistically, it has been proven that students’ relationship with the faculty af- fects their attitudes about and performance levels with information literacy skills.4Clearly this is a critical relationship because it involves the faculty in- troducing information literacy skills to students, modeling the use and mas- tery of these skills, and integrating them into the curriculum. The faculty are powerfully important in developing information-literate college students and in promoting lifelong learning and an information-literate citizenry.
Assessment Queries
The Neely Test includes seven items designed to glean more information about the nature of the relationships students might have with faculty mem- bers during their academic careers. The relationships were defined as either advisor/advisee (primarily graduate students) or classroom interaction (pri- marily undergraduate students).
One question inquires about the number of faculty members who have encouraged the use of information resources in a variety of formats. Another
Beyond the Standards 137
question, which also appears in the UMBC Survey, asks students about their experience(s) in the classroom and in completing course work:
In responding to this question, please consider your experience with faculty in completing required assignments for courses. Please select all that apply.
a. Faculty member requires no use of outside material for completing course assignments.
b. Faculty member requires use of only lectures and assigned textbook(s) for completing course assignments.
c. Faculty member requires use of library to retrieve reserve materials.
d. Faculty member makes use of library materials (print and/or electronic) when presenting course material and lectures.
e. Faculty member requires or suggests use of library materials (print and/or electronic) when assigning course work.
f. Faculty member invites librarians to introduce course-related library materials (print and/or electronic).
Responses to this query, along with specific academic department-related demographics, could provide key information about which departments or individual faculty members are referring students to the library and mod- eling positive information-literate behavior by recommending resources. A drawback to this query is that it does not reveal specific recommended re- sources. Students who receive a list of recommended journal titles from a faculty member could list that occurrence as a faculty member encouraging the use of library materials; but if the library does not own or no longer sub- scribes to the titles listed, is it really modeling positive information-literate behavior? Follow-up questions could be developed to ask students about the types of resources faculty have referred them to and if they felt the resources helped them in their research.
Another query from the UMBC Surveyfocuses on whether faculty members provide opportunities for students to be exposed to an information-literate environment.
Has a faculty member done any of the following? Please select all that apply.
a. Referred you to a specific librarian
b. Encouraged you to seek a librarian’s assistance
138 Beyond the Standards
c. Taken your class to the library for a librarian-led tour/
orientation
d. Taken your class to the library for one or more instruction sessions in the library and/or classroom
e. None of the above
Several of the questions from the Neely Testfocus specifically on the na- ture of the relationship itself. Students are asked if they have participated in any one-on-one-type relationships with faculty: independent study or re- search or teaching practicum. Students who respond positively are queried further on the nature of the relationship. The question that follows is pre- sented to students who responded positively to:
Have you participated in an independent study/student-initiated re- search under consultation with faculty member(s) [includes research papers, thesis, dissertation]? (yes/no)
If yes, please describe the nature of the relationship. Select all that apply.
a. Faculty made him/herself available for regular meetings and provided helpful feedback and required progress reports.
b. Faculty was knowledgeable about deadlines and departmental guidelines.
c. Faculty kept me informed about matters related to my academic well-being.
d. Faculty provided guidance and assistance in accessing resources (print and online) in conducting literature reviews.
e. Faculty often did not have time to meet with me to discuss my work.
Have you participated in directed research/teaching practicum with faculty member(s) [includes participating in research project or (co)teaching a course(s) designed by faculty]? (yes/no)
If yes, please describe the nature of the relationship. Select all that apply.
a. Faculty member(s) treated me respectfully as a junior colleague.
b. Faculty member(s) treated me as a gopher and student help.
Beyond the Standards 139
c. Faculty provided constructive criticism and feedback on project/teaching effort.
d. Faculty often did not have time to meet with me to discuss my work.
An additional question inquires about how the relationship(s) began.
In view of the type of relationships described in the items above, please indicate how the relationship started. Select all that apply.
a. No relationship of this type with faculty.
b. Faculty was highly regarded in subject area of interest.
c. Had prior relationship with faculty member.
d. Faculty member was recommended/assigned by the department.
e. Faculty member was recommended by other students/faculty.
f. Faculty invited me to participate in research project/teaching course.
The addition of queries that provide insight and useful data on faculty members’ interaction with students is strongly recommended. Clearly, these types of queries can provide rich data about teaching faculty and their com- mitment to information literacy skills integration into their classrooms and the curriculum.