The Power of CollaborationPromoting information literacy skills

in a Primary ITE course

Sarah PurcellAcademic Liaison Librarian

Rachel BarrellCourse Leader, Primary ITE

24th April 2014

Presented at

https://eprints.worc.ac.uk/3114/

A few facts and figures

BA(Hons) Initial Teacher Education with QTS. 3 year full time programme – 360 students

This course has been designed in partnership with local primary schools to meet the requirements for Initial Teacher Training and is intended for those who wish to train to teach all areas of the Primary CurriculumTwo pathways – Early Years (3-7) and Later Years (5-11)

Entry Requirements – 300 UCAS points, GCSE maths and English, 10 days recent experience in primary classroom, passed Professional Skills Tests (English and maths)

http://www.worcester.ac.uk/discover/university-history.html

It began with…. a meeting

• Summer 2010• External examiner feedback“However many students are unclear about the Harvard system in particular using inappropriate sources often cited from the internet and failing to follow conventions for direct and indirect quotes in text.” Mills, 2009

• Student comments to staff• Transition into HE• Academic writing – referencing, sources,

searching• Sarah’s PG Cert L&T in HE (SEDA 3)

The research title and objectives

What is the impact of an information skills teaching programme on first-year students’ confidence in and development of these skills?

• To evaluate what support was needed by new students, in what preferred medium and to what level (transition);

• To examine whether this level of input from the librarian is sustainable, given their current role, and propose ideas for managing this.

Problem

Intervention

Evaluation/ Reflection

Improve

‘Further Reading’ – examples of IL models

SCONUL 7 Pillars: http://www.sconul.ac.uk/sites/default/files/documents/researchlens.pdf

A New Curriculum for Information Literacy (ANCIL)http://www.slideshare.net/seckerj/ifla2012final and http://newcurriculum.wordpress.com/

Pre- and post- intervention surveysStart of Semester 1

Year 3: First year induction, then final year support with projects

Little awareness of sources beyond books

Unsure about referencing

Year 1: A-Levels, Access to HE and everything in between Inadvertent plagiarism, essay writing skills Expectations and lack of confidence

Start of Semester 2 Follow up surveys: 69 Y1 students and 13 teaching staff Level of agreement with range of statements to assess confidence

(students) and role (staff)

Qualitative feedback

Teaching programme: 2010-11

Semester 1: Session Content

Week 4 (Welcome

Week)

Induction (tours also scheduled throughout the week)

Whole cohort introduction to the library service including websites for further support and information. Introduction to action research project and ethics. Content: Demonstration of accessing a journal article, selected by the course leader and librarian. Tutors facilitated a seminar later that week in which students were expected to have accessed and read the article, and be prepared to discuss its content. Directed study: academic study scenarios to consider for Week 5’s session.

Week 5(first teaching

week)

Referencing One hour session with each of the five groups of app 28 students. Content: discussion of set task from previous week. Teaching and activities focused on Harvard referencing.  Directed study: Citing and referencing activity to be completed and submitted to librarian  

Week 6 Plagiarism One hour session with each of the five groups of app 28 students. Content: feedback re week 5’s task. Defined plagiarism and focused on strategies to avoid it, with some work on paraphrasing and academic writing.  Directed study: Further reading on academic writing.  

Week 7 Searching for information

One hour session with each of the five groups of app 28 students. Content: Introduction and demonstrations of various resources and searching techniques, included hands-on activities, all focused around an upcoming professional studies assignment. PC Room. 

Emerging themes

1. impact and timing

2. role of academic staff and librarian

3. collaboration and integration

4. online learning and support

5. gaps in the teaching

http://www.slideshare.net/SAPurcelland https://eprints.worc.ac.uk/3114/

Impact and timing (1)

Overall – positive impact on student confidence“The teaching has definitely made a big difference because I didn’t have a clue about referencing before I came here and in lectures the lecturers concentrate on the subject content rather than how to actually write essays. The teaching definitely made a difference to my learning…”

Teaching staff noted a positive difference in student work BUT…

Assignment moderation meeting with librarian in attendance: students were including sources and referencing them, but not necessarily integrating a range of different academic sources.

Impact and timing (2)

“I learnt more about referencing from the second teaching input in February. I think this was because I had received feedback from my assignments which allowed me to ask Sarah more specific questions…I think this is a very difficult area to understand until the first assignments have been written.”

“I thought the initial lessons with Sarah were informative, however I would have benefitted more had they not been in the initial weeks as there was so much information to take in…I think sessions closer to starting our initial assignment would have been more useful as it would have been fresher.”

Keywords: optionality, point of need, overload, ‘learning by doing’

Demystifying academic writing?

Academic writing: the “written synthesis” which represents and connects sources and concepts in a coherent and critical manner (Boscolo et al. 2007: p.423).

Essay writing requires content; it cannot be taught generically (Lupton 2008).

Clear link between librarian role and academic role? Is a ‘study skills approach’ truly effective? (Barrie

2007; Haggis 2006; Lea & Street 1998)

Collaboration and integration

“[Reminder] sessions for staff? Sometimes students report that the feedback is not as consistent as they would like.”

“Please could you run a session for the…research methods staff …so that we can support the students in their literature reviews.”

“Perhaps … more input from tutors as some have different expectations to others.” [Student]

Keywords: consistency, promotion, transition, communication

Sustainability and knowledge-sharing?

“[With] the right encouragement and help from [librarians]”, teaching staff might be better placed to “link those skills to purposeful information-seeking” (Pacey 1995: p.98).

New research cycles and progress2011-12 and 2012-13:

Persevered with four-week programme – changed order of content to reflect searching process, and removed/absorbed the scary plagiarism session

Increased input for years 2 and 3

External examiner feedback and student tracking-

No of 1st Class Degrees (10/11 9%, 11/12 13%, 12/13 16%)

August 2013: BERA/SAGE Practitioner Award

The aims of the award are: To support and encourage excellence in the application of

research in practice To disseminate the results of practitioner research and

practice To help practitioners to improve the quality of their work

by example.

2013-14: Powerful collaboration

Bitesize introductions to LibGuides, Summon etc – within mandatory modules, across all years

Formative tasks e.g. writing within modules, and assignment-related input – team teaching

Office hours and appointments (librarian)

Students more proactive, requesting specific input Working together to respond to common questions

and problems – Working in Partnership (WiP); Primary Referencing Guide; marking grid

(p.7)

In summary: what did we learn? Add-on, front loaded, study skills-based sessions didn’t

work for us (transferability issues)

Point of need, relevance of input and consistency of support are crucial for ongoing development of students’ academic skills (‘information literacy’?)

Team teaching and collaborative research can lead to happy accidents and strong working relationships

We can work with the resources we’ve got…if we are willing to collaborate and share (sustainability)

Encourage uptake of existing expertise across university (Visibility, promotion)

Students will tell you where you can improve and do more…if you encourage this collaboration from the start

ReferencesBarrie, S.C. (2007) A conceptual framework for the teaching and learning of generic graduate attributes. Studies in Higher Education. 32 (4), 439-458.

Boscolo, P., Arfé, B., & Quarisa, M. (2007) Improving the quality of students' academic writing: an intervention study. Studies in Higher Education. 32 (4), 419 – 438.

Haggis, T. (2006) Pedagogies for diversity: retaining critical challenge amidst fears of ‘dumbing down’. Studies in Higher Education. [Online] 31 (5), 521-535.

Lea, M.R. & Street, B.V. (1998) Student writing in higher education: an academic literacies approach. Studies in Higher Education. [Online] 23 (2), 157-172.

Lupton, M. (2008) Evidence, argument and social responsibility: first-year students’ experiences of information literacy when researching an essay. Higher Education Research & Development. 27 (4), 399-414.

Norton, L. (2009) Action research in teaching & learning: a practical guide to conducting pedagogical research in universities. Abingdon, Routledge.

Pacey, P. (1995) Teaching user education, learning information skills; or, Towards the self-explanatory library. The New Review of Academic Librarianship. 1, 95-103.

Pecorari, D. (2013) Teaching to avoid plagiarism: how to promote good source use. Maidenhead, Open University Press.

Vezzosi, M. (2006) Information literacy and action research: an overview and some reflections. New Library World. 107 (1226/1227), 286-301.

Wrathall, K. (2012) Strategies for implementing A New Curriculum for Information

Literacy. http://implementingancil.pbworks.com/w/file/55121848/Strategies for Implementing ANCIL in Non-Cambridge HEIs v3.pdf [NB: Uni of Worcester was one of the case studies, worth a look]