Norming a VALUE Rubric to Assess Graduate Information Literacy Skills

OBJECTIVE: The study evaluated whether a modified version of the information literacy Valid Assessment of Learning in Undergraduate Education (VALUE) rubric would be useful for assessing the information literacy skills of graduate health sciences students. METHODS: Through facilitated calibration workshops, an interdepartmental six-person team of librarians and faculty engaged in guided discussion about the meaning of the rubric criteria. They applied the rubric to score student work for a peer-review essay assignment in the Information Literacy for Evidence-Based Practice course. To determine inter-rater reliability, the raters participated in a follow-up exercise in which they independently applied the rubric to ten samples of work from a research project in the doctor of physical therapy program: the patient case report assignment. RESULTS: For the peer-review essay, a high level of consistency in scoring was achieved for the second workshop, with statistically significant intra-class correlation coefficients above 0.8 for 3 criteria: Determine the extent of evidence needed, Use evidence effectively to accomplish a specific purpose, and Access the needed evidence. Participants concurred that the essay prompt and rubric criteria adequately discriminated the quality of student work for the peer-review essay assignment. When raters independently scored the patient case report assignment, inter-rater agreement was low and statistically insignificant for all rubric criteria (kappa=-0.16, p\u3e0.05-kappa=0.12, p\u3e0.05). CONCLUSIONS: While the peer-review essay assignment lent itself well to rubric calibration, scorers had a difficult time with the patient case report. Lack of familiarity among some raters with the specifics of the patient case report assignment and subject matter might have accounted for low inter-rater reliability. When norming, it is important to hold conversations about search strategies and expectations of performance. Overall, the authors found the rubric to be appropriate for assessing information literacy skills of graduate health sciences students

Evaluation of recreational health risk in coastal waters based on enterococcus densities and bathing patterns.

We constructed a simulation model to compute the incidences of highly credible gastrointestinal illness (HCGI) in recreational bathers at two intermittently contaminated beaches of Orange County, California. Assumptions regarding spatial and temporal bathing patterns were used to determine exposure levels over a 31-month study period. Illness rates were calculated by applying previously reported relationships between enterococcus density and HCGI risk to the exposure data. Peak enterococcus concentrations occurred in late winter and early spring, but model results showed that most HCGI cases occurred during summer, attributable to elevated number of exposures. Approximately 99% of the 95,010 illness cases occurred when beaches were open. Model runs were insensitive to 0-10% swimming activity assumed during beach closure days. Comparable illness rates resulted under clustered and uniform bather distribution scenarios. HCGI attack rates were within federal guidelines of tolerable risk when averaged over the study period. However, tolerable risk thresholds were exceeded for 27 total days and periods of at least 6 consecutive days. Illness estimates were sensitive to the functional form and magnitude of the enterococcus density-HCGI relationships. The results of this study contribute to an understanding of recreational health risk in coastal waters