All across UT (and higher education in general), people are attempting to assess student learning and articulate the value of their programs to student success, measured by retention, on-time graduation, GPA, post-college success and more. While we are successfully measuring the impact of our sessions on student learning, meaning we know they are achieving our learning outcomes in our sessions for at least some of our programs, we haven’t measured whether what they are learning translates to more general success in or after college. Since Megan Oakleaf’s Value of Academic Libraries Review and Report in 2010, I have been wondering just what impact one-shot instruction sessions have on student success, whether that is defined as GPA, retention or on-time graduation. I am clearly not the only one wondering this so I put together this post as an attempt to answer that question.
In 2007, Joseph Matthews published the book “Library Assessment in Higher Education” which I haven’t read yet but have read about many times. He looked at studies up to 2007 and found that they are pretty evenly split between finding a correlation between library instruction, GPAs and retention and finding no correlation. I found a few more articles published since 2007 that represent what has been happening since his book came out. This list is by no means comprehensive but the articles illustrate the state of the research on the question and the ways people are approaching the question.
Vance, Jason M., Rachel Kirk, and Justin G. Gardner. “Measuring the Impact of Library Instruction on Freshman Success and Persistence: A Quantitate Analysis.” Communication in Information Literacy 6.1 (2012): 49–58.
Librarians from Middle Tennessee State University attempted to find out whether one-shots for freshmen impacted their GPAs and/or their likelihood of returning for a second year (retention). To do so, they gathered information about the one-shot classes they were offering to freshmen over a two year period, noting that these were introductory rather than research intensive classes. They also gathered information about high school GPA, family income, ACT scores, race, gender, and major (all variables that have been correlated with retention). The results of the study were that they could not find a direct connection between library instruction and student retention, although library instruction does appear to have a “small measurable correlation with student performance” (which, in turn, is tied to success and persistence). There were a lot of issues with the study that the authors themselves point out, including the fact that the students they included as having attended instruction sessions may not have – they were enrolled in the courses that came in but they may have skipped.
Wong, Shun Han Rebekah, and Dianne Cmor. “Measuring Association Between Library Instruction and Graduation GPA.” College & Research Libraries 72.5 (2011): 464–473.
Librarians from Hong Kong Baptist University looked at the correlation between GPA and library workshop attendance for 8,000+ students who graduated between 2007 and 2009. The findings were that GPAs were positively correlated with increased workshop offerings. In programs that offered 5 workshops, GPAs were highest. In those that offered 3 or 4, GPAs were positively affected and in those that offered 1 or 2, there was no positive correlation. Workshops, in this case, were a mix of required and voluntary, stand-alone and course integrated. One issue with this (and many) study is that it is only about correlation, not causation.
Bowles-Terry, Melissa. “Library Instruction and Academic Success: A Mixed-Methods Assessment of a Library Instruction Program.” Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 7.1 (2012): 82–95.
This study from the University of Wyoming used a mixed-methods approach, with qualitative data provided by focus groups with 15 graduating seniors and quantitative data provided by transcripts for about 4,500 students. The interesting thing about this study is that it provided some evidence for the idea that scaffolded information literacy instruction is most effective for student success. Students in the focus group said the ideal form of instruction was a session their freshmen year and then at least one more when they were farther along in their majors to focus more on doing research in their discipline. Transcript analysis showed a correlation (not causation) between GPA at graduation and getting upper division library instruction. Once again, the authors identified issues such as the fact that they didn’t know if students in the transcript analysis actually attended sessions or skipped that day, and the fact that the analysis only showed correlation.
So what is the answer to our question? A definitive “we don’t know.” And where does that leave us as we struggle to demonstrate our value to the teaching & learning mission of UT? It is clear that researchers in libraries are attempting to answer the question of whether what we do in library instruction is transferrable and positively impacts student’s retention, graduation and academic success. It is also clear that we can’t definitely say it does. On the plus side, I didn’t find anything saying it harmed students.
Questions for discussion:
- How do you articulate the value of library instruction to the students you work with? To the faculty?
- Is there something we could or should be doing here in the Libraries to attempt to answer the question?
- Does the fact that we don’t know affect your plans for library instruction provision
- Does the fact that we don’t know (beyond anecdotal evidence from our faculty) even matter?