124
Christensen (2008:239) observe that the findings from purposive samples are not easily generalized. Four librarians were selected from each university after consultations with the university librarians’ office to ensure that those chosen had or were participating in IL training.
A total of 12 librarians were selected from all the universities, as shown in Table 4.2.
Table 4.2: Sample sizes Subjects University
A
University B
University C
University D
Total
Students 43 28 48 28 147
Librarians 3 3
3 3 12
Psychology
Lecturers 4 4
4 4 16
Total 50 35
55 35 175
125
experimental, field and other data collection activities. Babbie added that questionnaires were appropriate for the collection of qualitative and quantitative data. The questions were developed partly based on the Association of College and Research Libraries' Information Literacy Competency Standards (2000) and partly guided by the research questions for this study.
The student questionnaire was adapted from the University of Sydney Student Course Experience Questionnaire (SCEQ) and modified to fit the current study. The researcher included questions that respondents would find simple and specific, to gather the information expected for the study, avoiding double-barrelled and long questions (Rubin & Babbie, 2008:202-2004). In addition to the demographics, the questionnaire covered library experiences, teaching and content of IL programmes, computer and IT experiences, learning environments for IL programmes and student gains from IL programmes . Qualitative questions 8-12 on the questionnaire sought to establish gains, challenges the students faced in learning IL and their perception of IL. In agreement with what Stec (2004) observed, the questionnaire was found to be an appropriate tool for assessing students’ experience concerning information literacy instruction, because it provided a standardised way of getting responses that facilitated quick quantification through the use of the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) for analysis.
Through the office of the heads of the psychology programmes or departments in the cases studied the distribution of questionnaires to students and schedules for interviews for lecturers was planned. The researcher personally participated in distributing the questionnaires and collecting them back in one sitting from three of the cases. In the fourth case, appointment with the lecturer teaching a key IL related course that was identified as having all the fourth year students enrolled, did not easily materialize. However, after the particular lecturer was interviewed, the lecturer agreed to distribute and collect questionnaires from students, which she did. Questionnaires in three cases were distributed at the beginning of a lesson, after the researcher explained the purpose of the exercise and informed respondents that they had the right to choose not to be part of the exercise. In one case, the students had finished their coursework and were doing end of course test. The lecturer allowed the first 20-30minutes of
126
the time to be used for filling in the questionnaires since this was the last semester for students and missing them would have delayed the data collection process for a longer time.
4.7.2 Interview Questions
In addition to using survey questionnaires, interview questions were prepared, one set for librarians and another set for lecturers. Themes for the interview questions for librarians were guided by the research questions and included understanding of the concept of information literacy, ways IL was taught and assessed, challenges and possible solutions to teaching IL by librarians, impact of ICT on IL and the place of IL in university education . For the lecturers, the themes for interview questions included biographical information, their understanding of the concept of IL, courses they teach that relate to IL, teaching and assessment approaches, ICT integration and impact, challenges of teaching IL-related courses and possible solutions, and the place of IL in university education. Care was taken to ensure that at least one lecturer was enlisted from each year of study through the assistance of the heads of departments and their administrative staff, in the respective universities. The interviews with lecturers and librarians were conducted to allow for in-depth investigation of the phenomenon (De Vos et al., 2011:351).
Appointments with psychology lecturers for interviews went well, except in two universities, where the researcher had to go several times without succeeding to hold the interviews, despite having confirmed appointments beforehand. In one case the researcher made appointments with a lecturer four times and finally the lecturer decided that time was a problem and so pulled out of the study. Since three lecturers had been interviewed, the researcher concluded that those interviewed gave sufficient information.
University librarians were helpful in organizing interviews with specific librarians chosen for the study and the perusal of documents used in IL instruction. Purposively selected respondents were librarians in charge of reference or reader services or instructional services, those who dealt with students and, in many cases, conducted IL on behalf of the library. The challenge with librarians’ interviews was in one university, where the university librarian was not easy to find, but after making an appointment a few times the interviews were facilitated. This sought
127
to establish whether or not the goals of the programme are explicitly stated, the methods of instruction and assessment approaches, the teaching schedules and hand-outs to students.
4.7.3 Document Analysis Guide
A review of the course syllabi and other documents related to the programme was undertaken, in connection with the decision of the researcher to undertake a multiple method approach to data collection. A document analysis guide was carefully developed to capture the statements of goals and objectives of the programmes, methods of instruction, assessment tools, IL teaching schedules and any materials given out to students. One document review form was used for each university. Yanow (2007:411) stated that document analysis was critical in interview or observation-based research, and may corroborate or refute interview or observational data. He added that documentary review ‘armed’ the researcher with evidence that clarifies or challenges what the researcher is being told. According to Prior (2003:4), documents in most social science research have been marginalized, yet they often carry invaluable information.