The final session at the QQML conference was a plenary session from Hazel Hall (Edinburgh Napier University) entitled What happens next? Strategies for building and assessing the long-term impact of research projects.
She has produced an excellent overview of it here: https://hazelhall.org/2016/05/27/strategies-for-building-and-assessing-the-long-term-impact-of-research-projects-closing-plenary-at-qqml2016/ and it is also on Slideshare (see below).
I may do one more post about QQML after I have trawled for further presentation links etc. Next year the QQML conference is in Limerick, Ireland.
Showing posts with label qqml2016. Show all posts
Showing posts with label qqml2016. Show all posts
Friday, May 27, 2016
#QQML2016 information literacy assessment: the threshold achievement test
Firstly Radcliff considered "dispositions". They have identified : productive persistence; tolerance for ambiguity; feeling responsible to the community; mindful self-reflection. They have mapped the ACRL Framework to 4 modules, each of which can be covered in a 50 minute session. For each module they identify the dispositions and knowledge outcomes which are relevant.
Radcliff talked about the challenging (though fun) activity of writing test items (they have multiple choice, rating items etc.). They are aiming to include higher order items. They have tested and piloted the test in various ways (detailed feedback from students, larger scale pilots etc.)
I have already expressed some doubts about this testing approach, but it is obvious they are going about this in a very thoughtful and thorough way, and that a lot of people are interested. The website is at https://thresholdachievement.com/
Photo by Sheila Webber: staircase in Senate House, a clever advert for their Shakepeare exhibition
#QQML2016 Gamifying Business Information Literacy
He decided to create a series of online business tutorials, and applied for a small research grant so he could use gamification in the tutorials: in this case to see whether digital badges engaged the students. Nielsen focused a specific course on Rhetoric and Writing, where he had reached 250 students in the first engagement with students, and 430 second engagement.
In terms of the tutorial, he considered using Adobe Connect, Blackboard and a homegrown system. He decided on Blackboard, as it does have a badging option, and also a means of enrolling all students in the tutorial. The tutorial has 3 sections, Finding, Evaluating and Using information, and in each section there are 2 subsections, one on company and on industry information. Nielsen used text, images, link, videos on Youtube, videos he created using Powtoons etc.
Badges on Blackboard are issued when they are triggered (so you set the trigger) and badges can be exported. The badged tutorials are going to pilot this autumn, with students surveyed, and also there will be a comparison between classes that have used the tutorials and classes which have had teaching in class.
Photo by Sheila Webber: lunchtime fruitplate, QQML conference
#QQML2016 : Collaboration and information literacy in Portuguese school libraries
A final day of liveblogging from the QQML conference. Ana Novo presented on Collaboration and information literacy in Portuguese school libraries. This presentation was based on PhD work (interviews with 20 teacher-librarians) and also work with Masters students (perceptions of 32 Masters students who were teacher-librarians). In Portugal they have to be qualified as teachers as well as librarians to work in schools. Novo identified some of the models that could be used for IL in the classroom e.g. Herring's and Kuhlthau's. She identified that part of the teacher librarian's role was convincing a school's director, teachers etc. that it was worth spending curriculum time on information literacy. Novo said that collaboration with teachers was important, but the teachers had more of an individualistic culture (my class, my pupils...). She cited Montiel-Overall (2005, 2006) as identifying that collaboration can impact school achievement, and Montiel-Overall also proposed 4 models of collaboration (coordination, cooperation, integrated instruction, integrated curriculum).
In the 20 interviews for the PhD study only the first two models were identified (coordination, cooperation). For the 32 Masters students, 12 each were in the first and 2nd model, 2 in the third and 6 were in transition (between 1st and 2nd and between 2nd and 3rd).
The conclusions were that there are difficulties in intergrating IL, with teacher very focused on his/her class.
Masters students had recommended e.g. training and awareness for teachers, flexible opening hours, organisisng events in the library, publicising it in the school newspeper etc.
In the 20 interviews for the PhD study only the first two models were identified (coordination, cooperation). For the 32 Masters students, 12 each were in the first and 2nd model, 2 in the third and 6 were in transition (between 1st and 2nd and between 2nd and 3rd).
The conclusions were that there are difficulties in intergrating IL, with teacher very focused on his/her class.
Masters students had recommended e.g. training and awareness for teachers, flexible opening hours, organisisng events in the library, publicising it in the school newspeper etc.
Thursday, May 26, 2016
#QQML2016 : Teaching Media Literacy, Did we Forget Literacy
Pylkkö described some of the activities e.g. making a video blog; making a picture collage of representations in the media; filling out activity sheets on a tablet.
She has been reflecting on how this connects to thinking skills, information literacy and reading skills. Children say that the most difficult things in the activities are e.g. thinking what to say on the vlog; understanding text (so challenges that have been around a long time - how to think and understand).
In order to explore these issues further Pylkkö contemplated Kuhlthau's model, but decided that a more suitable framework for her own context were Nelson Goodman's ideas. These are that paintings, photos etc. are worlds of their own each with their own system of codes. Thus, Understanding worlds = reading their symbol systems, and Not understanding = not understanding the symbol system.
Adapted to libraries; the librarian can be the person who introduces the learner to worlds and their symbols. This provides a framework for the librarian, and "literacy" is seen as competence in a specific semiotic system. Pylkkö also felt this helped to distinguish between ICT and literacy (and she talked at this point OECD and other research which showed that ICT use did not necessarily bring improvement in learning outcomes).
Pylkkö concluded that, using this approach, you would also embrace "traditional" concepts and content. She said that "Knowledge IS literacy, that is, ability to use different symbol systems in order to "make worlds"" - the worlds were e.g. "the library", "music", "art", "Books, DVDs, Video games" (the latter could be more than one world, also). Thus the librarian could concentrate on introducing the children to each of these worlds.
The presenter has written a paper (based on a talk at this conference 2 years ago) on a similar topic here http://www.qqml.net/papers/December_2014_Issue/3412QQML_Journal_2014_Pylkko_Dec_909-916.pdf
#QQML2016 : Methods for Authentically Assessing Information Literacy Instruction
She started by defining authentic assessment as allowing students to chose their own topics to research for assessment. The context for the intervention she was describing was one taken by 90 chemical engineering students. She posed the questions to herself: could students understand her lecture on searching and could they apply it to their own search questions. Therefore she did a follow up questionnaire asking, for example, if they had used peer reviewed articles for their term paper topic (which they had chosen themselves) and asked them to search on Scopus for their topic and copy their search history. Gift cards were given as incentives. 40% of the class responded and 10 students took up an offer for further search help. From the survey: students found relevant results on avaerage in 3 different sources. Common issues were over-broad topics and too many search results.
As a response to this, Badia took an action research approach and designed an activity. She put the students in groups. They had to create a research question incorporating one or more words from a list (the list was compiled by looking at previous students' term paper topics). She made it into a game, where there was a prize for the best research question - as the activity progressed students got better and better at critiquing the research questions.
She also introduced a pre and post test which included ranking search strategies. Then, once again she had a follow up survey, adding a search strategy ranking exercise. Whilst the post test showed improvement in search strategy judgement, the responses to the later survey showed the students had slipped back somewhat. This time a finding of note was that students were using insufficient numbers of concepts. Badia aims to introduce a new activity to help with this issue, the next time the class runs. Badia gave some tips at the end, including that she got better responses to surveys by handing them out in class, and if they are in colour they stand out more (a colleague suggested that perhaps students felt guilty walking out of the clas without doing it, when the paper was such a distinctive colour!)
#QQML2016 : Designing Services for a Federated University - and some Shakespeare
Another talk from the QQML conference, where I am today. Jackie Marfleet, Senate House Librarian, University of London (the venue for conference) talked about Collaboration and Co-operation: Designing Services for a Federated University. She explained the special position of Senate House library, which acts as a "second library" to the various universities which make up the federated University of London (which consists of University College London, King's College London, London Business School etc.). Primarily it serves researchers (rather than undergraduate students). Being in that position, the library very much has to demonstrate its value. One way of doing this is collecting statistics, e.g. there are 7.5 million individual accesses of electronic resources per annum, but it also has to demonstrate impact.
Marfleet talked about the difference between cost, value and quality, and how quality had to be defined by the target population. Strengths of the library included unique colection, helpfulness of staff, physical location: although it isn't open 24/7 a large majority also are happy with opening hours (since, again, it is used mainly by faculty and research students - who I suppose are less likely to want to be in the library in the middle of the night completing assignments - they will be up in the middle of the night writing in their own homes/offices). Feedback has been that people like the library because it is somewhere quiet and studious (as an alternative to noisier collaborative spaces): highlighting again that people do not have standard, uniform wants and needs. Marfleet also talked about public engagement e.g. the major Shakespeare exhibition currently on (which has its own microwebsite): http://shakespeare.senatehouselibrary.ac.uk/ and here's a nice video shot in the library
Marfleet talked about the difference between cost, value and quality, and how quality had to be defined by the target population. Strengths of the library included unique colection, helpfulness of staff, physical location: although it isn't open 24/7 a large majority also are happy with opening hours (since, again, it is used mainly by faculty and research students - who I suppose are less likely to want to be in the library in the middle of the night completing assignments - they will be up in the middle of the night writing in their own homes/offices). Feedback has been that people like the library because it is somewhere quiet and studious (as an alternative to noisier collaborative spaces): highlighting again that people do not have standard, uniform wants and needs. Marfleet also talked about public engagement e.g. the major Shakespeare exhibition currently on (which has its own microwebsite): http://shakespeare.senatehouselibrary.ac.uk/ and here's a nice video shot in the library
#QQML2016 Trends and Challenges to Future Libraries: Exploring Research Approaches
This morning at the QQML conference I gave my invited talk: Trends and Challenges to Future Libraries: Exploring Research Approaches. It is embedded below: in it I present an exaggerated view of the challenging future of (academic) libraries, describe examples of phenomenographic, ethnograpic, autoethnographic, case study and action research, and finally explain how qualitative research can develop librarians and libraries and enable them to meet challenges. It includes all the references, in the last few slides.
Wednesday, May 25, 2016
#QQML2016 impact of training on information seeking behaviour
Mariza Talim (a medical librarian) taught 15 hours (including similar sessions offered to different groups). The training concentrated on search strategy, using functions of the two databases etc. There were 82 participants. Data was collected through 3 questionnaires: pre and post test questionnaires, and the third administered 4-5 months after training. This third one asked them about a critical incident, and aimed to determine impact on practice. There was also a pre and post test. The data was analysed descriptively and comparing the before and after questionnaires.
The large majority of participants' perceptions of the training was positive. Trainees reported increased use of conference papers, systematic reviews etc., less use of Google and more frequent use of MEDLINE etc. The pre and post tests and questionnaires showed an increase in skills. The third questionnaire (asking them to think of a search incident before and after training) showed that participants who responded (I think it was 21) were getting more information after training and they were still using Google less and health databases more.
#QQML2016 Scholarly sharing of articles
Another post from the QQML conference. Carol Tenopir (with a presentation coauthored with prject partnered) reported on an international study which is investigating researchers' behaviours with sharing articles etc. They have undertaken focus groups in the USA and the UK and administered a questionnaire survey in various countries. They have discovered that people are sharing both informally and informally, in all sorts of ways e.g. via email, reference management software, printing things out. 16.7 full text articles and 8.6 links/references were on average shared by respondents (asked what they had shared in their last project). The mean number of articles downloaded per project were 65 (with a range between zero and 500, so working out percentage of those shared based just on average items shared seems too simplistic). Just over half of the downlaods came from library collections. Out of the works shared (whether their own work or others) the large majority were of the published version of the article.
There were some differences based on age e.g. people under 30 and over 60 shared less. Also there were some disciplinary differences e.g. engineers shared more via email and through other informal methods, social scientists shared a lot and shared more on social media. The project website is http://libraryconnect.elsevier.com/beyond-downloads and Carol Tenopir's publications on Researchgate are here: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Carol_Tenopir/publications
There is, for example, a paper about this research here (so here I am, as a social science researcher, sharing links informally....)
There were some differences based on age e.g. people under 30 and over 60 shared less. Also there were some disciplinary differences e.g. engineers shared more via email and through other informal methods, social scientists shared a lot and shared more on social media. The project website is http://libraryconnect.elsevier.com/beyond-downloads and Carol Tenopir's publications on Researchgate are here: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Carol_Tenopir/publications
There is, for example, a paper about this research here (so here I am, as a social science researcher, sharing links informally....)
#QQML2016 report: Ethnographic study at Long Island University libraries
Just now, Valida Dent (pictured, in the red jacket) talked about a mixed methods (mainly ethnographic) study of student research behaviours at Long Island University libraries (USA). They used qualitative and quantitative methods, and aimed to illuminate students’ behaviour when they were doing academic work for assignments etc. The researchers did interviews, a 50-item questionnaire survey (including asking students what apps they were using on their mobile devices), and 32 hours of observation in the library. Observation was informed by findings from the survey to prompt foci for attention. Findings included (just to highlight a couple of things from the survey) that students found the library website confusing, that they were using library databases and google about equally, and they “were bringing their culture with them to their academic studies” on their mobile devices e.g. religious apps. Findings from the observation included that while students were sitting in groups, they were often working individually, including communicating via their phones with people sitting close to them.
There was a presentation on this research at LILAC, which is on Slideshare here http://www.slideshare.net/infolit_group/what-actually-happens-an-ethnographic-investigation-of-student-library-use-eamon-tewell-natalia-tomlin-kim-mullins and an article by the presenter Applying Ethnographic Research Methods in Library and Information Settings on Academia.edu at https://www.academia.edu/2012915/Applying_Ethnographic_Research_Methods_in_Library_and_Information_Settings
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)