Information Literacy Assessment: A Contextual Overview

1. Information Literacy Assessment: A Contextual Overview Keith Gresham Head of Information & Instruction Services University of Vermont Libraries VLA College & Special Libraries SectionAldrich Public Library — Barre, VermontApril 7, 2006

2. “The existence of information holds little to no value to people who do not even know what information they need, much less whether it exists or not, or how to locate, evaluate and effectively use it.” –Patricia Breivik United Nations Education, Scientific, and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), National Forum on Information Literacy (NFIL) and the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA). High-Level Colloquium on Information Literacy and Lifelong Learning [Final Report]. March 2006. (Report of a meeting held at the Bibliotheca Alexandrina, Alexandria, Egypt on November 6-9, 2005).

3. Best Practices in Information Literacy Information literacy programs in colleges and universities across the country vary in scope and structure, but the best programs all: • require the leadership and support of academic administrators • integrate information literacy instruction widely throughout the curriculum • involve collaboration among classroom faculty, program administrators, librarians and other information professionals on campus • interpret information literacy as an integral component to the learning process • employ learner-centered, experiential and reflective pedagogical approaches • include measures of assessment for both program and student performance ACRL Institute for Information Literacy. Characteristics of Programsof Information Literacy that Illustrate Best Practices: A Guideline. June 2003.

4. Global Call to Action Recommendation #5: Require information literacy as a significant criterion in student and teacher assessment and institutional accreditation: Train educators about student assessment practices that focus on information literacy outcomes. Associate standards for assessment and accreditation of information literacy with learning outcomes rather than inputs and processes. United Nations Education, Scientific, and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), National Forum on Information Literacy (NFIL) and the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA). High-Level Colloquium on Information Literacy and Lifelong Learning [Final Report]. March 2006. (Report of a meeting held at the Bibliotheca Alexandrina, Alexandria, Egypt on November 6-9, 2005).

5. NEASC / CIHE Accreditation Standards • Standard 4.6 • The institution ensures that students use information resources and information technology as an integral part of their education and provides appropriate orientation and training for use of these resources, as well as instruction and support in information literacy. • Standard 4.18 • Graduates of undergraduate programs demonstrate the capability for continuing learning, including the skills of information literacy. • Standard 4.19 • Requirements for the major or area of concentration [include] mastery of the knowledge, information resources, methods, and theories pertinent to a particular area of inquiry. Standards for Accreditation, NEASC/CIHE (2005)

6. 3 Types of IL Assessment for Student Learning • Prescriptive or diagnostic • Assesses knowledge and skill prior to instruction • Example: standardized or instructor-developed pre-test • Formative • Provides ongoing assessment of student learning during the instructional period so that teaching can be adapted to meet student needs • Examples: reaction paper, classroom poll, focused listing • Summative • Assessment of student learning as measured against established criteria at end of instruction • Example: qualitative evaluation of citations in final paper International Federation of Library Associations. Information Literacy Section. Guidelines for Information Literacy Assessment. 2004.

7. National Assessment Initiatives • ICT Literacy Assessment (ETS Collaboration) • Web-based “real-time” scenario-based tasks (reliability & validity tested) • Proficiency Areas: Define, Access, Manage, Integrate, Evaluate, Create, Communicate • Tests at both basic and advanced levels • Individual and aggregate results • Cost: $33 per test (minimum order of 100 tests) • Project SAILS (Kent State/ARL) • Web-based multiple choice test (reliability & validity tested) • Proficiency areas linked to ACRL Standards 1,2,3,5 • Tests at both basic and advanced levels • Individual and aggregate results • Cost: $3 per test ($2000 maximum) • Discipline-specific tests under development

8. Lindauer’s 3 Arenas of IL Assessment Bonnie Gratch Lindauer. The Three Arenas of Information Literacy Assessment. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 44, 2 (2004): 123.

9. IL Assessment Process • Reflective • provides concrete feedback for critical reflection and enables students to reflect formatively on their own development • Integrative • incorporates the larger institutional goals for information literacy within the disciplines and in the classroom • Iterative • recurring refinement in which institutional self-examination and self-improvement are ongoing activities Middle States Commission on Higher Education. Executive Summary. Developing Research & Communication Skills: Guidelines for Information Literacy in the Curriculum. Philadelphia, PA: MSCHE, 2003.