Successfully reported this slideshow.
Your SlideShare is downloading. ×

The development of students as information literate individuals: Results from an 86% complete PhD in Information Literacy - Ellen Nierenberg & Tove I. Dahl

Ad

The development of students as
information literate individuals
Results from an 86% complete
PhD in Information Literacy
E...

Ad

Tromsø: 69.6o
north latitude

Ad

January 6th, 2021: Storming the Capitol
Photo: Wikipedia Commons

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Check these out next

1 of 34 Ad
1 of 34 Ad

The development of students as information literate individuals: Results from an 86% complete PhD in Information Literacy - Ellen Nierenberg & Tove I. Dahl

Download to read offline

Presented at LILAC 2022

Presented at LILAC 2022

Advertisement
Advertisement

More Related Content

More from IL Group (CILIP Information Literacy Group) (20)

Advertisement

The development of students as information literate individuals: Results from an 86% complete PhD in Information Literacy - Ellen Nierenberg & Tove I. Dahl

  1. 1. The development of students as information literate individuals Results from an 86% complete PhD in Information Literacy Ellen Nierenberg – PhD student Tove I. Dahl, Professor of psychology – main supervisor
  2. 2. Tromsø: 69.6o north latitude
  3. 3. January 6th, 2021: Storming the Capitol Photo: Wikipedia Commons
  4. 4. Gaps - Longitudinal studies on the development of IL over time - Relationships between knowing, doing, and feeling - Students’ self-awareness of their IL levels - The role of interest in IL development
  5. 5. Main research question: How do students grow as information literate individuals in higher education? 1. How can we measure students’ IL knowledge (KNOW), skills (DO), and interest in being or becoming information literate? (FEEL)? 1. How self-aware are students of their own IL levels and how does that motivate them to learn more about IL? 1. In which ways do students grow and change as IL individuals over a 3-year BA-program?
  6. 6. MEASURES
  7. 7. 1. How can we measure students’ IL knowledge (KNOW), skills (DO), and interest in being or becoming information literate (FEEL)?
  8. 8. IL Bundy (2004). Australian and New Zealand Information Literacy Framework (ANZIL) SCONUL (2011). The SCONUL Seven Pillars of Information Literacy ACRL (2015). Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education UNESCO (2013). Global Media and Information Literacy Assessment Framework Eisenberg, Berkowitz (1998/2000). The Big6
  9. 9. Measuring IL Knowing Doing Tromsø Information Literacy Test (TILT) What characterizes a scholarly article? • It is written by a researcher from a college, university or other research institution. • It is published in a printed, English-language journal. • It is written in plain language that everyone can understand. • It is reviewed by independent experts in the field before being published. Source use Source evaluation Source evaluation measure (annotated bibliography) • Quality • Variety • Frequency Source use measure (rubric) 1. Are academic sources used to support arguments? 2. Are sources cited in the text when necessary? 3. Are the in-text citations written in correct APA-style? 4. Is the reference list written in correct APA- style? 5. Are all in-text citations listed in the reference list, and vice versa?
  10. 10. Measuring Interest Interest TRIQ Tromsø Interest Questionnaire (TRIQ) Based on Hidi and Renninger (2006)
  11. 11. Measuring Interest Interest TRIQ Tromsø Interest Questionnaire (TRIQ) subscales General interest How interested are you in being an information literate person? Situation dependence Without others, I would lose interest in being or becoming an information literate person. Positive affect How little or much do you experience these feelings in relation to being or becoming an information literate person? (pleasure, happiness, interest, engagement) Competence (Level, Aspiration) Overall I feel I am an information literate person. I want to learn more about information literacy. Meaningfulness To be an information literate person is very useful for me.
  12. 12. Interviews Focus groups Indi- vidual IL Knowing Transformational IL learning Identity as an information literate person IL Interest (feeling) IL Doing
  13. 13. Data collection Materials Participants/Cohort Data collection Knowing Pilot IL test Undergraduate students from 2 universities - Apr. ‘19 Pilot think-aloud - 3 first-year Bachelor students - 2 final-year high school students - June ‘19 IL test Masters and PhD students from several universities - Spring ‘20 IL test + 3 questions about interest in IL, need/intent to learn Bachelor and PhD students from several universities - Fall ‘20 Feeling Pilot interest questionnaire Psych. undergraduates at different levels - May ‘19 Focus group interviews Psych. students in last semester of Bachelor study. Cohort ‘18 - Spring ‘21 Individual interviews Psych. students in the last semester of Bachelor study. Cohort ‘19 - Spring ‘22 Knowing and feeling Survey with IL test and interest questionnaire Psych. Bachelor-students, cohort ’19 (IL instruction fall ‘19). Longitudinal 3 yrs. - Sep. ’19 (pretest) - Nov. ’19 - Apr. ‘21 - March ‘22 Other Bachelor students, cohort ‘19 - Sep. ’19 - Nov. ’19 Psych. Bachelor students, cohort ’20 (IL instruction spring ‘21). Longitudinal 2 yrs. - Aug. ’20 (pretest) - May ‘21 - May ‘22 Doing Assignments - Source evaluation - Source use Psych. students: Cohort ‘19 - Fall ’19 - Spring ‘22 Psych. students: Cohort ‘20 - Spring ‘21
  14. 14. https://site.uit.no/troils/
  15. 15. SELF- AWARENESS
  16. 16. How self-aware are students of their own IL levels and how does that influence their motivation to learn more about IL?
  17. 17. Actual score Estimated score 760 BA, MA and PhD students
  18. 18. Analyses of variance (ANOVA’s) between: 1. higher education groups (BA/MA/PhD) and gender (M/F) 2. higher education groups and performance level (low/high) 1. Do students estimate their scores differently? • Is there a main effect for gender? • Is there a main effect for education level? • Are there any interactions? 2. Do low-performing students estimate their scores differently from high-performing students? • Is there a main effect for performance level? • Is there a main effect for education level? • Are there any interactions?
  19. 19. Actual score: 14.80 Estimated score: 13.79 n = 471 Actual score: 14.83 Estimated score: 14.96 n = 227 Gender
  20. 20. MA BA Actual score: 12.71 Estimated score: 11.95 n = 330 Actual score: 16.06 Estimated score: 15.50 n = 196 Ph D Actual score: 16.89 Estimated score: 16.43 n = 234 Education level
  21. 21. Low scorer Actual score: 9.72 Estimated score (BA): 10.20 n = 137 High scorer Actual score: 15.43 Estimated score (BA): 13.48 n = 145 Performance level
  22. 22. Analyses of variance (ANOVA’s) between: 1. higher education groups (BA/MA/PhD) and gender (M/F) 2. higher education groups and performance level (low/high) 1. Do students estimate their scores differently? • Is there a main effect for gender? Yes, F(1, 741) = 10.44, p = 0.001, η2 = 0.01 • Is there a main effect for education level? No • Are there any interactions? Yes, F(2, 741) = 4.38, p < 0.05, η2 = 0.01 2. Do low-performing students estimate their scores differently from high-performing students? • Is there a main effect for performance level? Yes, F(1, 612) = 66.87, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.10 • Is there a main effect for education level? No • Are there any interactions? No
  23. 23. Need to know Interes t Future intention to learn more r = 0.48 r = 0.15 n = 124
  24. 24. GROWTH
  25. 25. In which ways do students grow and change as IL individuals over a 3-year BA-program? Nierenberg, E., Låg, T., Solberg, M. & Dahl, T. I. (in progress). Knowing, feeling and doing: A longitudinal study of students’ information literacy development. 1. How do KNOW, DO and FEEL – and their interaction – change over a 3-year BA program? 2. How do students’ perceptions of themselves as information literate people evolve? Does transformative learning (a change in identity) occur?
  26. 26. Knowing Feeling Doing First year Third/last year
  27. 27. The contribution of my research • Measures • Self-awareness and motivation to learn more • Growth and transformation
  28. 28. Future research • Effect of IL instruction: • 1-shot vs. integrated/embedded • 1st vs. 2nd semester • Growth: • 1 🡪 2 • 2 🡪 3 • Case study: follow individual students over 5 years
  29. 29. Main research question: How do students grow as information literate individuals? 1. How can we measure IL knowledge (KNOW), skills (DO), and students’ interest in being or becoming information literate? (FEEL)? 2. How self-aware are students of their own IL levels and how does that motivate them to learn more about IL? 3. In which ways do students grow and change as IL individuals over a 3-year BA-program?
  30. 30. Understanding the development of information literacy in higher education: Knowing, feeling, and doing
  31. 31. https://blogg.uit.no/eni081
  32. 32. List of articles 1. Nierenberg, E., Låg, T. & Dahl, T. I. (2021). Knowing and doing: The development of information literacy measures to assess knowledge and practice. Journal of Information Literacy, 15(2), 78– 123. https://doi.org/10.11645/15.2.2795 2. Dahl, T. I., & Nierenberg, E. (2021). Here’s the TRIQ: The Tromsø Interest Questionnaire based on the Four-Phase Model of Interest Development. Frontiers in Education, 6(402), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.716543 3. Nierenberg, E., & Dahl, T. I. (2021). Is information literacy ability, and metacognition of that ability, related to interest, gender or education level? A cross-sectional study of higher education students. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/09610006211058907 4. Nierenberg, E., Låg, T., Solberg, M. & Dahl, T. I. (in progress). Knowing, feeling and doing: A longitudinal study of students’ information literacy development.
  33. 33. Thank you! Ellen Nierenberg, Tove I. Dahl
  34. 34. Ellen Nierenberg PhD student in information literacy UiT The Arctic University of Norway Email: ellen.nierenberg@uit.no Telephone: +47 99435850 Twitter: @EllenNierenberg Tove I. Dahl Professor in Educational Psychology UiT The Arctic University of Norway Email: tove.dahl@uit.no Telephone: +47 77645456

×