RIOT began with a round-robin. Roxanne shared a recent “crashing failure.” She worked with a nutrition professor to assign pre-readings on how to write scientific articles. Not many of the students did the reading. The professor did not attend the session and was not there to scold them. Roxanne dealt with this problem by summarizing the readings for the students, proving that she was flexible and able to think on her feet.
Michele shared the Meghan had assigned some preliminary readings and tutorials before some of her classes and it worked. There was probably some kind of accountability, or perhaps the students had to submit something beforehand.
Janelle shared her experience. She assigned something that the students had to complete before the session. She said it was a success.
Cindy shared her strategy of a two-shot instruction session: She assigns something to be submitted and works with the professor to make sure there is a participation grade in Canvass.
Martha then summarized why she thought the article was interesting:
• It was realistic: one-shot 50 min session
• She liked that they used a Google search to evaluate comprehension of concepts
• She liked the blind methodology of not telling students what they were really studying
• Overall, it was a simple approach was refreshing
Martha was also heartened because the study showed that one-shot actually do work.
Other points of interest:
• Background literature: internet is easier to use than library resources; students will sacrifice quality for ease-of-use
• Students with low info-literacy skills are less-likely to know that they need training. “They don’t know that they don’t know”
• Sex/gender or other variables didn’t have a significant influence
• Students who had library sessions made better judgments about the authority of the resources and had better/more sophisticated justifications of their judgments
• Students demonstrated that they were transferring the skills and using these techniques in more personal, casual searches
• How can we incorporate these findings in how we approach instruction?
• Are there any interesting concepts that are not being addressed?
• What did people think of the study’s methodology?
Kristen shared that there is often not enough time in these sessions to cover evaluating information.
Michele said that we know that one-shots are not enough, but that’s all we have.
Cindy questioned whether we could use these findings to demonstrate the need for more library instruction and the case for selecting relevant, non-library resources later in life
Martha stated that the study shows that library sessions are more than databases and tools: they are about critical thinking and information literacy.
Kristen stated that there is something to be said for teaching students that there is proprietary, subscription-based information.
AJ said that this is the other side of libraries promoting open-access, promoting that Libraries have access to proprietary information.
Cindy said she thought the Libraries should do more to promote the public library and access.
Janelle pointed out that it is often difficult to find academic research at the public library and that she recommends that graduates join professional associations to access those associations’ journals.
Roxanne uses a pre-class survey to determine students’ exposure to info-literacy and previous library instruction.
Many spoke of increased library usage and questions from students who had information literacy sessions. The study showed that students ask more, and more complex, questions after information literacy sessions.
The group discussed that students often do not know what kinds of questions to ask. We may need to provide examples. What can you Ask a Librarian?