1. Embedding information literacy in an undergraduate Management module: reflecting on students’ performance and attitudes over two academic years Clive Cochrane School of Management & Economics Queen’s University Belfast

2. Presentation aims Discuss issues relating to embedding information literacy in a module from a lecturer’s perspective Compare students’ performance in an information literacy assignment over two academic years Compare students’ attitudes to information literacy over two academic years Draw some conclusions

3. Introduction

4. Background 2004-05 received funding from TQEF to embed information literacy (IL) on two undergraduate Management modules: –Developing People (semester 1 – level 2) –Marketing Communications (semester 2 – level 3) 2005-06 IL still a feature of both modules Individual assignment (20%) a common feature of Developing People module in both years – two tasks: –Compile a short annotated bibliography –Reflect on learning and value of IL.

5. Student diversity 2004 – 71 students on the module Module attracts students from a number of degree pathways International students –8 Chinese –1 Swede Students with disabilities 2005 – 80 students on the module Module attracts students from a number of degree pathways International students –9 Chinese Students with disabilities

6. Learning support for students 2004-052005-06 Support material on QOL Lecture by librarian (Oct) Lecture by lecturer (Nov) Seminar - writing annotations Written feedback

7. Methods Data collected from the assignments students submitted –Quantitative data – students’ marks –Qualitative data – students’ reflective comments Data collected from administering a questionnaire –Quantitative data – Likert rating scales –Qualitative data – open-ended responses

8. The assignment Assignment 04 Mentoring OR Coaching Bibliographical exercise 80 % Reflective comments 20% Assignment 05 Investors in People Bibliographical exercise 65% Reflective comments 35%

9. Students’ performance

10. 2004 Average mark for the assignment 66% Range 37-88 Many students made some mistakes and / or encountered areas of difficulty 2005 Average mark for the assignment 62% Range from 41-80 Many students made some mistakes and / or encountered areas of difficulty

11. 13.637 - 8866.1100Percentage mark for assignment Overall marks awarded for the assignment 2 – 53.65Comment on skills for the future 1 - 43.05Comment on filtering 1 - 52.95Comment on the most useful information source 2 - 53.65Comment on searches and problems Reflective comments 10 - 2416.130Five annotations based on PROMPT 15 - 4533.745Bibliography containing 15 items 2 - 53.35Introduction Bibliographical exercise Standard deviation Range of marks Average mark MarkElement 2004

12. 14.741-8061.9100Percentage mark for assignment Overall marks awarded for the assignment 3-75.210Assess the value of information literacy skills 2-74.910Comment on criteria used to filter information 4-118.415Comment on searches and problems Reflective comments 10-2818.13010 annotations based on PROMPT 8-3022.430Bibliography containing 10 items 2-53.05Introduction Bibliographical exercise Standard deviation Range of marks Average mark MarkElement 2005

13. Assignment results - 2004

14. Assignment results - 2005

15. Common mistakes, areas of difficulty 0405 Not following guidelines (books)YY Not following guidelines (journal articles)YY Not following guidelines (web sites)YY Not following PROMPT guidelineYY Ineffective presentation of bib. + annotationsYY Ineffective overall presentationYY Not understanding basic terminologyYY Poor use of EnglishYY Difficulty in expressing IL terminologyYY

16. Some evidence of similar / improved performance 2004 Writing bibliographic descriptions Marks allocated – 45 Average gained – 34 75% Writing annotations Marks allocated – 30 Average gained 16 54% 2005 Writing bibliographic descriptions Marks allocated – 30 Average gained – 22 75% Writing annotations Marks allocated – 30 Average gained – 18 60%

17. Students’ attitudes

18. Students’ attitudes to information literacy At end of semester 1 in December 2004 and 2005 respectively a questionnaire distributed to all students 2004 – 56 out of 71 responded (79%) 2005 – 41 out of 80 responded (52%) Questionnaire – three identical sections 13 skills (easy, useful, perception of competence)

19. Degree of difficulty (1 = v.easy to 5 = v.difficult) Rating for 2004 Rating for 2005 1 Planning a search to cater for the user’s needs.2.42.3 2 Identifying appropriate search terms when using a search engine (e.g Yahoo). 2.3 3 Using a search engine to find relevant web sites.2.32.0 4 Using a gateway (e.g. SOSIG) to find relevant web sites. 2.62.8 5 Identifying appropriate search terms when using an online database (e.g. ABI Inform, Lexis Nexis). 2.52.2 6 Searching an online database to find relevant items (e.g. journal articles. 2.62.1 7 Using the QUB library online catalogue find relevant items (e.g. books). 2.62.2 8 Determining criteria to filter information.2.82.7 9 Describing the ‘bibliographic’ details of a web site in a systematic way. 2.72.8 10 Describing the bibliographic details of a book using the Harvard method. 2.52.3 11 Describing the bibliographic details of a journal article using the Harvard method. 2.62.3 12 Using a systematic method, such as PROMPT, to annotate an item (e.g. a book, a web site, a journal article). 2.92.7 13 Compiling a bibliography in a systematic way.2.4

20. Usefulness of IL skills (1= useless to 5 = v. useful) Rating for 2004 Rating for 2005 1 Planning a search to cater for the user’s needs.3.73.9 2 Identifying appropriate search terms when using a search engine (e.g Yahoo). 3.94.0 3 Using a search engine to find relevant web sites.3.9 4 Using a gateway (e.g. SOSIG) to find relevant web sites. 3.5 5 Identifying appropriate search terms when using an online database (e.g. ABI Inform, Lexis Nexis). 4.14.0 6 Searching an online database to find relevant items (e.g. journal articles). 4.14.2 7 Using the QUB library online catalogue find relevant items (e.g. books). 3.83.9 8 Determining criteria to filter information.4.13.9 9 Describing the ‘bibliographic’ details of a web site in a systematic way. 3.83.7 10 Describing the bibliographic details of a book using the Harvard method. 3.83.7 11 Describing the bibliographic details of a journal article using the Harvard method. 3.83.7 12 Using a systematic method, such as PROMPT, to annotate an item (e.g. a book, a web site, a journal article). 4.13.9 13 Compiling a bibliography in a systematic way.4.13.9

21. Students’ perception of competence (1=not competent to 5 = very competent) Rating for 2004 Rating for 2005 1 Planning a search to cater for the user’s needs.3.94.0 2 Identifying appropriate search terms when using a search engine (e.g Yahoo). 4.14.2 3 Using a search engine to find relevant web sites.4.24.3 4 Using a gateway (e.g. SOSIG) to find relevant web sites. 3.63.5 5 Identifying appropriate search terms when using an online database (e.g. ABI Inform, Lexis Nexis). 3.94.1 6 Searching an online database to find relevant items (e.g. journal articles). 4.04.3 7 Using the QUB library online catalogue find relevant items (e.g. books). 3.94.1 8 Determining criteria to filter information.3.9 9 Describing the ‘bibliographic’ details of a web site in a systematic way. 3.83.9 10 Describing the bibliographic details of a book using the Harvard method. 4.04.1 11 Describing the bibliographic details of a journal article using the Harvard method. 3.94.1 12 Using a systematic method, such as PROMPT, to annotate an item (e.g. a book, a web site, a journal article). 3.83.9 13 Compiling a bibliography in a systematic way.4.04.1

22. General reflective comments I feel I have developed several skills though this research. Not only am I considerably more knowledgeable on the topic of mentoring, but I have learnt how to effectively and efficiently search through vast amounts of material. I have also become significantly better at evaluating each source to ensure that the best resources available are found and included. (04) These will be useful skills to have in the future as the use of ICT continually grows in the business world, eventually all sources of information will be found online. Being able to find information quickly and efficiently will increase productivity and aid the overall business. (04)

23. General reflective comments I was relatively confident in my ability to access information through books and websites, but was a bit of a novice when it came to accessing and obtaining information from databases. Although I found the experience very frustrating in the beginning I soon found with the help of my lectures, tutorials and notes that a little patience and planning assisted me greatly and it wasn’t long until I could obtain the relevant information I needed, to my great relief and satisfaction. (05 ) I now understand that the quality of information you obtain is an important issue and you can evaluate it using PROMPT. I have also learnt that it is important to present the materials listed in a bibliography using the Harvard method to ensure that items can be traced. All this will assist me in my further studies at QUB in the short term and in the long term, when I begin to work in an organisation, as companies now regard information as a very important resource. (05)

24. Conclusions Lecturers alter their delivery and assessment methods in the light of students’ performance and feedback Students’ performance is influenced by the nature of assignments Students are developing their information literacy skills.

25. Conclusions Students make similar mistakes and encounter similar problems each year Students regard the skills to be both relatively easy and useful Students regard themselves to be reasonably competent Students recognise that information literacy is valuable in the short and long term.