Standardised library instruction assessment: an institution-specific approach
Information Research, Vol: 15, Issue: 3
2010
- 1,484Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage1,484
- Downloads1,278
- 1,278
- Abstract Views206
Article Description
Introduction We explore the use of a psychometric model for locally-relevant, information literacy assessment, using an online tool for standardised assessment of student learning during discipline-based library instruction sessions.Method A quantitative approach to data collection and analysis was used, employing standardised multiple-choice survey questions followed by individual, cognitive interviews with undergraduate students. The assessment tool was administered to five general education psychology classes during library instruction sessions.AnalysisDescriptive statistics were generated by the assessment tool. Results. The assessment tool proved a feasible means of measuring student learning. While student scores improved on every survey question, there was uneven improvement from pre-test to post-test for different questions.Conclusion Student scores showed more improvement for some learning outcomes over others, thus, spending time on fewer concepts during instruction sessions would enable more reliable evaluation of student learning. We recommend using digital learning objects that address basic research skills to enhance library instruction programmes. Future studies will explore different applications of the assessment tool, provide more detailed statistical analysis of the data and shed additional light on the significance of overall scores.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know