This poster reports results of an assessment of student writing from the first-year seminar/experience programs at five separate undergraduate colleges. Papers (n=520) were coded by level of librarian involvement in the class, and then scored using an Information Literacy rubric. Results indicate that students in courses with higher librarian involvement demonstrate better IL skills (that are statistically significant) than those in courses with low involvement

Booth, Char

Lowe, M. Sara

Stone, Sean

Tagge, Natalie

Scholarship@Claremont

Claremont CollegesScholarship @ ClaremontLibrary Staff Publications and Research Library Publications8-1-2014Librarians Matter!* Librarian Impact on First-YearInformation Literacy Skills at Five Liberal ArtsCollegesM. Sara LoweClaremont University ConsortiumChar BoothClaremont University ConsortiumNatalie TaggeClaremont University ConsortiumSean StoneClaremont University ConsortiumThis Presentation is brought to you for free and open access by the Library Publications at Scholarship @ Claremont. It has been accepted for inclusionin Library Staff Publications and Research by an authorized administrator of Scholarship @ Claremont. For more information, please contactscholarship@cuc.claremont.edu.Recommended CitationLowe, M. Sara; Booth, Char; Tagge, Natalie; and Stone, Sean, "Librarians Matter!* Librarian Impact on First-Year Information LiteracySkills at Five Liberal Arts Colleges" (2014). Library Staff Publications and Research. Paper 30.http://scholarship.claremont.edu/library_staff/30Librarians Matter!* Librarian Impact on First-Year Information Literacy Skills at Five Liberal Arts Colleges Sara Lowe, Assessment Librarian; Char Booth, Director of Research, Teaching, and Learning Services; Sean Stone, Science & Asian Studies Librarian; Natalie Tagge, Instruction Librarian – Claremont  Colleges Library, Claremont, CA * Special thanks to Dani Brecher, Instructional Design and Technology Librarian, Claremont Colleges,  for the Librarians Matter! Infographic of pilot study results. See: http://bit.ly/CCL_infographic.  Research Question “What impact (if any) does librarian intervention in first-year courses have on IL performance in student work?”  Methodology FMI: sara_lowe@cuc.claremont.edu; http://libguides.libraries.claremont.edu/AiA  Data Results Conclusion • Students in courses with Level 2 (one-shot) Librarian Collaboration scored lower (statistically significantly lower) in all three Information Literacy rubric skill areas than those in courses with Level 3 and 4 Librarian Collaboration. • No statistically significant difference overall between student’s IL skills in Level 3 vs. Level 4 courses.  Is there a library instruction “sweet spot”? • Not enough Level 1 collaboration papers received to make any conclusions about students’ IL skills in classes with no Librarian Collaboration. While it has long been suspected that the one-shot is not as effective as more intensive collaborations on students’ Information Literacy skills in the long-term, this project provides evidence that this is the case.  In short, the more collaborative and scaffolded the instruction, the more effective library instruction appears to be. Based on these results, we recommend librarians (and faculty) continue (or increase) their efforts to design assignments and syllabi in collaboration as well as strategically  involve librarians in the classroom. Attribution Evaluation Communication p-value (one shot v. high) 0.000000016 0.0000000008375 0.00000000408 < .05 is statistically significant This project is part of the program "Assessment in Action: Academic Libraries and Student Success" which is undertaken by the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) in partnership with the Association for International Research and the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities. The program, a cornerstone of ACRL's Value of Academic Libraries Initiative, is made possible by the Institute of Museum and Library Services. Courses • 5 Liberal Arts College First-Year Seminar/ Experience programs • Claremont McKenna College, Pitzer College, Pomona College, Scripps College, Harvey Mudd College  • Courses have different learning outcomes and assignments • BUT all require use of outside sources and are able to be scored using IL rubric Librarian Collaboration • Papers coded by Level of Librarian Collaboration in Course • 1 = None • 2 = Low (one-shot) • 3 = Moderate (multiple sessions, moderate syllabus/assignment collaboration) • 4 = High (multiple sessions, online tutorial & quiz,  significant syllabus/assignment collaboration)  Papers • 521 Papers • 17 interrater pairs • Jan-July, 2014  Rubric  • Rubric‡ evaluation of papers : 3 areas - Attribution, Evaluation of Sources, Communication of Evidence Rubric Levels: • 1 = initial • 2 = emerging • 3 = developed • 4 = highly developed College Specific-Results College A : by Collaboration Level  College B : by Collaboration Level College C : by Collaboration Level College D : total scores Papers from 11 of 31 sections (n=72). Most collaborations are one-shots.  2.18 2.41 2.56 2.53 3.03 2.84 1234Attribution Evaluation CommunicationOne-Shot (Level 2) High (Level 3-4)Papers from 15 of 19 sections (n=151). 95% confidence level (5% margin of error). Equal balance of one-shot and higher level collaborations. Attribution Evaluation Communication p-value (one shot v. high) 0.0115 0.0000229 0.01859765 Papers from 17 of 17 sections (n=162). 95% confidence level (5% margin of error). All collaborations higher than one-shots (Level 3 or 4). Papers from 2 (one each Level 2 and Level 3) of 11 sections (n=31). Most courses do not collaborate with librarians. Sample size not large enough. 2.61 2.65 2.75 2.75 2.84 2.82 1234Attribution Evaluation Communication Level 3  Level 4Attribution Evaluation Communication p-value (3 v. 4) 0.130579 0.047787 0.270188 2.32 3.03 2.77 1234Attribution Evaluation Communication2.2 2.43 2.32 2.5 2.53 2.72 1234Attribution Evaluation CommunicationOne-Shot (Level 2) High (Level 3-4)Attribution Evaluation Communication p-value (one shot v. high) 0.05019 0.286363 0.014926 Overall Results College E : by Collaboration Level Papers from 9 of 13 sections (n=103). Most courses have higher level collaborations.   2.13 2.38 2.35 2.61 2.89 2.82 1234Attribution Evaluation CommunicationRubric Levels Information Literacy Areas Evaluated by Rubric Total First-Year Paper Rubric Scores by  Librarian Collaboration Level One-Shot (Librarian Collaboration Level 2) High (Librarian Collaboration Level 3-4)1.77 1.86 2 2.74 3.16 2.91 1234Attribution Evaluation CommunicationOne-Shot (Level 2) High (Level 3-4)Attribution Evaluation Communication p-value (one shot v. high) 0.00000000314 0.00000000000168 0.000000000155 ‡ Originally adapted from a rubric at Carleton College (Gould Library Reference and Instruction Department. "Information Literacy in Student Writing Rubric and Codebook." Northfield, MN: Carleton College. 2012. http://go.carleton.edu/6a).  

Librarians Matter!* Librarian Impact on First-Year Information Literacy Skills at Five Liberal Arts Colleges

Keck Graduate Institute

Claremont Colleges
Scholarship @ Claremont
Library Staff Publications and Research Library Publications
8-1-2014
Librarians Matter!* Librarian Impact on First-Year
Information Literacy Skills at Five Liberal Arts
Colleges
M. Sara Lowe
Claremont University Consortium
Char Booth
Claremont University Consortium
Natalie Tagge
Claremont University Consortium
Sean Stone
Claremont University Consortium
This Presentation is brought to you for free and open access by the Library Publications at Scholarship @ Claremont. It has been accepted for inclusion
in Library Staff Publications and Research by an authorized administrator of Scholarship @ Claremont. For more information, please contact
scholarship@cuc.claremont.edu.
Recommended Citation
Lowe, M. Sara; Booth, Char; Tagge, Natalie; and Stone, Sean, "Librarians Matter!* Librarian Impact on First-Year Information Literacy
Skills at Five Liberal Arts Colleges" (2014). Library Staff Publications and Research. Paper 30.
http://scholarship.claremont.edu/library_staff/30
Librarians Matter!* Librarian Impact 
on First-Year Information Literacy 
Skills at Five Liberal Arts Colleges 
Sara Lowe, Assessment Librarian; Char Booth, Director of 
Research, Teaching, and Learning Services; Sean Stone, 
Science & Asian Studies Librarian; Natalie Tagge, 
Instruction Librarian – Claremont  Colleges Library, 
Claremont, CA 
* Special thanks to Dani Brecher, Instructional Design and Technology Librarian, Claremont 
Colleges,  for the Librarians Matter! Infographic of pilot study results. See: 
http://bit.ly/CCL_infographic.  
Research Question 
“What impact (if any) does librarian 
intervention in first-year courses have on IL 
performance in student work?”  
Methodology 
FMI: sara_lowe@cuc.claremont.edu; 
http://libguides.libraries.claremont.edu/AiA  
Data 
Results Conclusion 
• Students in courses with Level 2 (one-shot) Librarian 
Collaboration scored lower (statistically significantly 
lower) in all three Information Literacy rubric skill areas 
than those in courses with Level 3 and 4 Librarian 
Collaboration. 
• No statistically significant difference overall between 
student’s IL skills in Level 3 vs. Level 4 courses.  Is there 
a library instruction “sweet spot”? 
• Not enough Level 1 collaboration papers received to 
make any conclusions about students’ IL skills in classes 
with no Librarian Collaboration. 
While it has long been suspected that the one-shot is not 
as effective as more intensive collaborations on students’ 
Information Literacy skills in the long-term, this project 
provides evidence that this is the case. 
 
In short, the more collaborative and scaffolded the 
instruction, the more effective library instruction appears 
to be. Based on these results, we recommend librarians 
(and faculty) continue (or increase) their efforts to design 
assignments and syllabi in collaboration as well as 
strategically  involve librarians in the classroom. 
Attribution Evaluation Communication 
p-value (one shot v. high) 0.000000016 0.0000000008375 0.00000000408 
< .05 is statistically significant 
This project is part of the program "Assessment in Action: Academic Libraries and 
Student Success" which is undertaken by the Association of College and Research 
Libraries (ACRL) in partnership with the Association for International Research and the 
Association of Public and Land-grant Universities. The program, a cornerstone of ACRL's 
Value of Academic Libraries Initiative, is made possible by the Institute of Museum and 
Library Services. 
Courses 
• 5 Liberal Arts College First-Year Seminar/ 
Experience programs 
• Claremont McKenna College, Pitzer College, 
Pomona College, Scripps College, Harvey 
Mudd College  
• Courses have different learning outcomes 
and assignments 
• BUT all require use of outside sources and 
are able to be scored using IL rubric 
Librarian 
Collaboration 
• Papers coded by Level of Librarian 
Collaboration in Course 
• 1 = None 
• 2 = Low (one-shot) 
• 3 = Moderate (multiple sessions, moderate 
syllabus/assignment collaboration) 
• 4 = High (multiple sessions, online tutorial & 
quiz,  significant syllabus/assignment 
collaboration)  
Papers 
• 521 Papers 
• 17 interrater pairs 
• Jan-July, 2014  
Rubric  
• Rubric‡ evaluation of papers : 3 areas - 
Attribution, Evaluation of Sources, 
Communication of Evidence 
Rubric Levels: 
• 1 = initial 
• 2 = emerging 
• 3 = developed 
• 4 = highly developed 
College Specific-Results 
College A : by Collaboration Level  College B : by Collaboration Level 
College C : by Collaboration Level 
College D : total scores 
Papers from 11 of 31 sections (n=72). Most collaborations are 
one-shots.  
2.18 2.41 
2.56 2.53 
3.03 2.84 
1
2
3
4
Attribution Evaluation Communication
One-Shot (Level 2) High (Level 3-4)
Papers from 15 of 19 sections (n=151). 95% confidence 
level (5% margin of error). Equal balance of one-shot and 
higher level collaborations. 
Attribution Evaluation Communication 
p-value (one shot v. 
high) 0.0115 0.0000229 0.01859765 
Papers from 17 of 17 sections (n=162). 95% confidence 
level (5% margin of error). All collaborations higher 
than one-shots (Level 3 or 4). 
Papers from 2 (one each Level 2 and Level 3) of 11 
sections (n=31). Most courses do not collaborate with 
librarians. Sample size not large enough. 
2.61 2.65 2.75 2.75 2.84 2.82 
1
2
3
4
Attribution Evaluation Communication
 Level 3  Level 4
Attribution Evaluation Communication 
p-value (3 v. 4) 0.130579 0.047787 0.270188 
2.32 
3.03 2.77 
1
2
3
4
Attribution Evaluation Communication2.2 2.43 2.32 2.5 2.53 
2.72 
1
2
3
4
Attribution Evaluation Communication
One-Shot (Level 2) High (Level 3-4)
Attribution Evaluation Communication 
p-value (one shot v. high) 0.05019 0.286363 0.014926 
Overall Results 
College E : by Collaboration Level 
Papers from 9 of 13 sections (n=103). Most courses 
have higher level collaborations.   
2.13 2.38 2.35 
2.61 
2.89 2.82 
1
2
3
4
Attribution Evaluation Communication
Ru
br
ic
 L
ev
el
s 
Information Literacy Areas Evaluated by Rubric 
Total First-Year Paper Rubric Scores by  
Librarian Collaboration Level 
One-Shot (Librarian Collaboration Level 2) High (Librarian Collaboration Level 3-4)
1.77 1.86 2 
2.74 
3.16 2.91 
1
2
3
4
Attribution Evaluation Communication
One-Shot (Level 2) High (Level 3-4)
Attribution Evaluation Communication 
p-value 
(one shot 
v. high) 0.00000000314 0.00000000000168 0.000000000155 
‡ Originally adapted from a rubric at Carleton 
College (Gould Library Reference and Instruction 
Department. "Information Literacy in Student 
Writing Rubric and Codebook." Northfield, MN: 
Carleton College. 2012. http://go.carleton.edu/6a).  


English

http://scholarship.claremont.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1028&context=library_staff

Librarians Matter!* Librarian Impact on First-Year Information Literacy Skills at Five Liberal Arts Colleges

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Scholarship@Claremont

Keck Graduate Institute