Creating Meaningful Information Literacy Assignments for an Introductory Agriculture Course Marianne Stowell Bracke Purdue University Libraries mbracke@purdue.edu

AGR 10100 Introduction to Agriculture & Purdue University OVERVIEW AGR 10100 Introduction to Agriculture & Purdue University Required 8 week course / 0.5 Credits / 500 students Objectives: Learn about the College of Agriculture and its academic departments and programs Understand academic policies and procedures/how to use educational resources Examine career opportunities, current issues, and priorities in the food, agricultural, environment and natural resources system

FIRST…A RESEARCH PAPER List of topics provided (controversial ag issues) 2-3 pages Papers were returned/revised/resubmitted Why didn’t it work? The students lacked the ability to write and think about the research process! Pick a topic, write an abstract, find research articles, synthesize the material, and make the argument “For over three-fourths (84%) of the students surveyed, the most difficult step of the course-related research process was getting started.” http://projectinfolit.org/pdfs/PIL_Fall2010_Survey_FullReport1.pdf

NEW APPROACH New Objective: identifying differences between scholarly and general articles Used the Calibrated Peer Review (CPR) system Online system designed by a chemistry professor at UCLA Requires assignments to be created up-front addressing all levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy (knowledge & comprehension, synthesis, and evaluation) Introduces the scientific process of peer-review Students practice writing and critical thinking skills User group for support at Purdue Suitable for large classroom settings!

“CPR empowers students to write to learn rather than learn to write…When students write, they are required to organize their thoughts, make decisions about what is relevant, convey their thoughts, and arrive at conclusions…” --Arlene A. Russell, Chemistry Lecturer, UCLA

ASSIGNMENT 1 (week 1) Assignment and submissions online Read "Indian Tribe Wins Fight to Limit Research of Its DNA" by Amy Harmon in the New York Times (April 21, 2010) and Guide for Source Materials Write essay based on descriptive (yet limited) questions The text you wrote is in paragraph form What made the article newsworthy (summary) One thing that you didn't know before you read the article Way(s) you would go about finding more information about what you didn't know How the author's credentials impact her authority to write about a topic An example of how the author cited her sources An explanation of how you could use this article in your research process, or an explanation of why you would not find this to be helpful at all in your research process

ASSIGNMENT 1 (week 2) 3. Read 3 sample essays and peer review Written by me (good, excellent, and poor version) Asked to peer review along the same guideline questions (e.g., Does the author include a summary? If no, give details) System assigns a rating on their ability to peer review 4. Read 3 of their (anonymous) classmates essays and review Same guideline questions are used Encourage descriptive, yet professional comments Grade assigned based on algorithm of completing all parts, their ability to review and the average of the peer-written reviews Second set of assignments asked them to read "Access to Stem Cells and Data: Persons, Property Rights, and Scientific Process" by Debra J. H. Mathews, et al., in Science (Vol. 331, 11 February 2011) and compare the two articles through another series of questions.

I can tell the difference between a scholarly article and a general article Χ2 = 278.339 P < .0001

Peer review (feedback from my fellow students) helps me understand what I did well and what I could have done better χ2 = 33.8148 P < .0001

I feel prepared to find appropriate sources for my next research assignment Χ2 = 27.2709 P < .0001

I feel confident about my ability to write at the college level Χ2 = 41.9188 P < .0001

In the future I would consult a librarian if I had a research question that I didn’t know how to answer χ 2 = 9.9916 P < 0.0406

CONCLUSIONS Four of the five questions showed clear statistical difference between pre- and post-test Main objective was met – students understand the difference between a scholarly and general article Evidence suggest that CPR is achieving the desired results

FUTURE DIRECTIONS Match the individual student responses for pre- and post-test with the final grade and some demographic info (e.g., high school background) Change the second part of the assignment, need more descriptive direction Purdue is creating an enterprise version of CPR

THANK YOU! QUESTIONS? Marianne Stowell Bracke Purdue University Libraries mbracke@purdue.edu