Case studies in the classroom: assessing a pilot information literacy curriculum for English composition

IF 1.3 4区 管理学 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
Rachel Wishkoski, Katie Strand, A. Sundt, Deanna Allred, Diana J. Meter
{"title":"Case studies in the classroom: assessing a pilot information literacy curriculum for English composition","authors":"Rachel Wishkoski, Katie Strand, A. Sundt, Deanna Allred, Diana J. Meter","doi":"10.1108/RSR-01-2021-0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThis mixed-methods study assesses a pilot library curriculum in a general education English composition course. Case-based learning (CBL), a form of problem-based learning (PBL), was used to scaffold information literacy skills and concepts across sessions. This article explores the approach's impact on student learning and engagement.Design/methodology/approachParticipants were enrolled in four sections of an undergraduate composition course. Two sections were taught with the CBL library curriculum, and two with the standard library curriculum as a control. Pretest/posttest surveys included quantitative and qualitative measures to assess students in several areas of information literacy. Weekly reflections from a subsample of students were analyzed, and the research team conducted structured classroom observations and teaching reflections.FindingsQuantitative survey results did not support the hypotheses that the CBL curriculum would increase students' confidence and skill levels compared to their control section peers. Although there was no significant difference between sections in measured information literacy outcomes, students generally agreed that the case studies used in the CBL curriculum taught skills applicable to their research. Teaching observation data revealed the cohesion of the curriculum across library sessions and increased student engagement in classroom activities. However, some of the case studies could be improved, and some limitations in study design point to the need for further research.Originality/valueThis study addresses a gap in the literature through a mixed-methods assessment of CBL pedagogy using a control group, contributing to an understanding of the role of PBL pedagogies in information literacy curricula.","PeriodicalId":46478,"journal":{"name":"Reference Services Review","volume":"49 1","pages":"176-193"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reference Services Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/RSR-01-2021-0004","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

PurposeThis mixed-methods study assesses a pilot library curriculum in a general education English composition course. Case-based learning (CBL), a form of problem-based learning (PBL), was used to scaffold information literacy skills and concepts across sessions. This article explores the approach's impact on student learning and engagement.Design/methodology/approachParticipants were enrolled in four sections of an undergraduate composition course. Two sections were taught with the CBL library curriculum, and two with the standard library curriculum as a control. Pretest/posttest surveys included quantitative and qualitative measures to assess students in several areas of information literacy. Weekly reflections from a subsample of students were analyzed, and the research team conducted structured classroom observations and teaching reflections.FindingsQuantitative survey results did not support the hypotheses that the CBL curriculum would increase students' confidence and skill levels compared to their control section peers. Although there was no significant difference between sections in measured information literacy outcomes, students generally agreed that the case studies used in the CBL curriculum taught skills applicable to their research. Teaching observation data revealed the cohesion of the curriculum across library sessions and increased student engagement in classroom activities. However, some of the case studies could be improved, and some limitations in study design point to the need for further research.Originality/valueThis study addresses a gap in the literature through a mixed-methods assessment of CBL pedagogy using a control group, contributing to an understanding of the role of PBL pedagogies in information literacy curricula.
课堂案例研究:评估英语作文信息素养课程试点
目的这项混合方法研究评估了普通教育英语作文课程中的图书馆试点课程。基于案例的学习(CBL)是一种基于问题的学习(PBL),用于在不同的课程中构建信息素养技能和概念。本文探讨了这种方法对学生学习和参与的影响。设计/方法论/方法参与者参加了本科生作文课程的四个部分。两个部分采用CBL图书馆课程,两个部分以标准图书馆课程为对照。测试前/测试后调查包括定量和定性措施,以评估学生在几个信息素养领域的表现。分析了一个子样本学生的每周反思,研究团队进行了结构化的课堂观察和教学反思。发现定量调查结果并不支持CBL课程与对照组同龄人相比会提高学生信心和技能水平的假设。尽管在衡量信息素养的结果方面,各部分之间没有显著差异,但学生们普遍认为,CBL课程中使用的案例研究教授了适用于他们研究的技能。教学观察数据揭示了图书馆课程的凝聚力,并增加了学生对课堂活动的参与。然而,一些案例研究可以改进,研究设计中的一些局限性表明需要进一步研究。独创性/价值本研究通过使用对照组对CBL教学法进行混合方法评估,解决了文献中的空白,有助于理解PBL教学法在信息素养课程中的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Reference Services Review
Reference Services Review INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
10.00%
发文量
16
期刊介绍: Reference Services Review (RSR ) is a quarterly, refereed journal dedicated to the enrichment of reference knowledge and the advancement of reference services. RSR covers all aspects of reference functions, including automation of reference services, evaluation and assessment of reference functions and sources, models for delivering quality reference services in all types and sizes of libraries, development and management of teaching/learning activities, promotion of information literacy programs, and partnerships with other entities to achieve reference goals and objectives. RSR prepares its readers to understand and embrace current and emerging technologies affecting reference functions, instructional services and information needs of library users.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信