Miikka Sipilä, Mervi Miettinen and Johanna Tevaniemi ECIL 2018 Adapting the new ACRL framework to IL education at Tampere University of Technology Miikka Sipilä, Mervi Miettinen and Johanna Tevaniemi ECIL 2018

Presentation outline Background Information literacy teaching at Tampere University of Technology Modifying the ACRL frames Implementing IL at TUT Results of IL teaching Student self-assessment Teacher assessment of students

Teaching IL in Finnish university libraries Emphasizing the library user’s perspective. Adopting the ACRL (Association of College and Research Libraries) standards. National IL programme: integration of IL into university studies a collaborative network and various interlibrary projects.

Teaching IL at Tampere University of Technology Before: Based on ACRL standards. Not compulsory for students. Designed independently by the library. Now: New ACRL frames adopted into teaching in 2016. All students attend IL teaching at regular intervals. Designed together with the faculty teaching staff.

Modified IL frames at TUT Library Information sharing and scientific interaction Information retrieval as a part of the research process Producing and evaluating information Copyright and ethical use of information

IL teaching outlines at TUT Teaching contents 1st year students -Library services and materials in brief - Basics of information retrieval - Ethical use of information, citing and referencing -Open science -Information literacy and information retrieval skills as study skills BSc students -Information retrieval as a process, information retrieval plan -Subject-specific databases -Information retrieval techniques and strategies -Evaluating information critically -Uses of open data -Good scientific practice (reference management, avoiding plagiarism) MSc students -Systematic information retrieval (incl. search diary, literature review) -Subject-specific databases (advanced) -Critically evaluating sources, Scholarship as conversation -Using information ethically as a part of a thesis -Benefits of open publishing

Implementing IL at TUT– the role of the Library In 2016, IL teaching became mandatory to all TUT students to ensure equal access to high-quality teaching. IL integrated into existing courses in collaboration with faculties. The Library is still responsible for planning and executing all IL contents. All teaching at Library premises.

Partnership through collaboration – involving the faculty Active and equal collaboration between the library and faculties’ teaching staff was key to the successful implementation of IL teaching. Differences between disciplines taken into account.

Practical planning – Using the frames TUT model easy on resources: identical structures enable resource management and are easy to apply. IL frames an advantage: the benefits of cumulative learning through deepening the frames according to level of study. The student’s role as an active learner!

IL frames at the front: student self-assessment BSc students answered a feedback form in 2016 (n=130) and 2017 (n=32). Students evaluated their information retrieval skills (scale 1-5, 1=very poor, 5=very good)  2016 1 2 3 4 5 - All Average Before attending IL-teaching 27 69 28 130 3,0 After attending IL-teaching 12 92 25 4,1  2017 1 2 3 4 5 - All Average Before attending IL-teaching 11 9 32 2,88 After attending IL-teaching 26

Teacher assessment of students’ IL skills (outtake) Information retrieval as a part of the research process Producing and evaluating information Information sharing and scientific interaction Copyright and ethical use of information

Conclusion Collaboration with faculties is the key to success. Modified IL frames enable cumulative learning. Students self-assessment shows positive development. NOTE: Teacher assessement also positive (though more cautious). Long-term results are still coming (2018 feedback not yet collected).

Thank you! + References American Library Association: Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education. ALA, Chicago (2015) American Library Association: Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education. ALA, Chicago (2000) American Library Association: Presidential Committee on Information Literacy. Final Report. ALA, Chicago (1989) Mackey, T., Jacobson, T.: Reframing Information Literacy as a Metaliteracy. College & Research Libraries, vol. 72(1), 62-78 (2011) Langley-Palmer, L.: Review of the book Teaching Information Literacy Reframed, by J. Burkhardt. SCONUL Focus, vol. 68, 92 (2017) SCONUL Advisory Committee on Information Literacy. Information skills in higher education: a SCONUL position paper. Prepared by the Information Skills Task Force, on behalf of SCONUL (1999) Middle States Commission on Higher Education: Developing Research and Communication Skills: Guidelines for Information Literacy in the Curriculum. MSCHE, Philadelphia (2003) Burgess, C.: Teaching Students, Not Standards: The New ACRL Information Literacy Framework and Treshold Crossings for Instructors. Partnership: the Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, vol. 10(1), 1-6 (2015) Foasberg, N.: From Standards to Frameworks for IL: How the ACRL Framework Addresses Critiques of the Standards. Libraries and the Academy, vol. 15(4), 699-717 (2015) Sinikara, K., Järveläinen, L.: Information literacy development in Finland. Library Review, vol. 52(7), 333-339 (2003) Campbell, S.: Defining Information Literacy in the 21st Century. In: World Library and Information Congress: 70th IFLA General Conference and Council, paper 059-E, 1-9 (2004) Kokko, M.: Toiminnallisella Tiedonhankinnalla Kytkentöjä Opintoihin. Jyväskylän yliopisto, https://peda.net/id/c67380c86 Informaatiolukutaidon opintosuunnitelma - yliopistokirjastojen yhteinen SVY-hanke 2004-2006, http://www.helsinki.fi/infolukutaito/ILarkisto/IL-OPS_arkisto.html Suositus Suomen korkeakouluille – Informaatiolukutaito korkeakouluopinnoissa, http://yliopistokirjastot.fi/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/ILsuositus_FI.pdf Zhang, Q., Goodman, M., Xie, S.: Integrating Library Instruction into the Course Management System for a First-Year Engineering Class: An Evidence-Based Study Measuring the Effectiveness of Blended Learning on Students' Information Literacy Levels. College and Research Libraries, vol. 76(7), 934-958 (2015) Wakeman, C.: Information literacy in the context of contemporary teaching methods in higher education. In Walton, G., Pope, A. (eds.) Information Literacy: Inflitrating the agenda, challenging minds, pp. 71-84. Oxford: Chandos Publishing (2011) Saarti, J.: Informaatiolukutaito-tavoitteiden Integroiminen Yliopisto-opetukseen – Kuopion Yliopiston Kokemuksia. In: Nevgi, A. (ed.) Informaatiolukutaito Yliopisto-opetuksessa, pp. 127-145. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press (2007) Asplund, J., Hakala, E., Sallama, S., Tapio, S.: Integrating Information Literacy Education into the Curriculum at the University of Tampere, Finland. Nordic Journal of Information Literacy in Higher Education, vol. 5(1), 3-10 (2013) Oakleaf, M., Millet, M., Kraus, L.: All Together Now: Getting Faculty, Administrators, and Staff Engaged in Information Literacy Assessment. Libraries and the Academy, vol. 11(3), 831-852 (2011) González-Betancor, S.M., Bolívar-Cruz, A., Verano-Tacoronte, D.: Self-assessment accuracy in higher education: The influence of gender and performance of university students. Active Learning in Higher Education, 1-14 (2017)

Contact info Miikka Sipilä (University of Tampere) miikka.sipila@uta.fi Mervi Miettinen (Tampere University of Technology) mervi.miettinen@tut.fi Johanna Tevaniemi (Tampere University of Technology) johanna.tevaniemi@tut.fi