MAKERERE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY IN PARTNERSHIP WITH SWEDISH UNIVERSITY OF
AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES (SLU) LIBRARY
At Makerere University Library 16th – 20th June and 1st – 5th September 2014
11/11/2014
1

th
th
ST
TH
1.
The Libraries of Makerere University (Mak) and Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
(SLU) have informational literacy programs which aim at enhancing access to the wealth of information resources within their reach. One of the information literacy programs at both
Libraries is a postgraduate cross-cutting course as elaborated below:
Makerere University Library (Maklib) has been running two major Information Literacy (IL) courses that run annually, namely: a.
Information Competence and Management Course: a graduate cross-cutting course b.
Digital Literacy (formerly Learning & Teaching in a Digital World, LATINA)
Like-wise, the SLU Library has been running a PhD course: Information Retrieval and
Methods of Scientific Communication at SLU.
Librarians of Maklib and SLU Library reviewed their IL course contents between September
2013 and June 2014 in a bid to synergise and develop a joint course that was named
Information Literacy and Scholarly Communication (ILSC).
COURSE OBJECTIVE
The aim of the course is to contribute to the development of high-level collaborative and international research by imparting information competence and scientific communication skills and knowledge.
The ILSC team saw it fit to conduct a separate workshop for senior academics, research policy makers and Librarians with a focus on strategic publishing, open access and institutional repositories, which form part of the ILSC modules. This was done to cater for the above listed categories since the ILSC course was for PhD students only. The workshop theme was “Open access and scholarly communication: global and local perspectives” (OA). Both the ILSC course and OA workshop were conducted twice in 2014, i.e. June and September/October.
The first ILSC course ran from 16 th -20 th June 2014. Its evaluation by participants and facilitators provided the feedback in preparation and planning of the second course, which ran
1 st – 5 th September 2014.
COURSE DESCRIPTION
The course covered essential components of the search process in relation to information literacy and scholarly communication. The PhD course took place at Makerere University
Library during five full days’ lectures and interactive workshops.
2.
Each session of lectures and workshops are tutorials by both SLU University Library and
Makerere University Library.
Evaluation and examination:
2

The pre-course identification of knowledge gaps aimed for making it possible to tailor participant needs. This captured the global perspectives as the participants did provide input to the preparation of the course content.
Methods of assessment
Online continuous evaluation and assessment were conducted in the last 15 minutes of each day by each participant. Examination were carried on the basis of oral presentations and written assignments.
st
th
th
The newly developed ILSC course was advertised at and attracted participants from Makerere
University (Mak, Uganda), SLU (Sweden), Sokoine University (Tanzania), National
University of Rwanda (Rwanda) and Jomo Kenyatta University (Kenya).
The ILSC course planning and content review meetings, which started in 2013 and concluded in 2014, took place both at SLU and Mak. Part of the planning was online through email exchanges of course documentation and online chats due to the geographical locations of the partner universities. The final planning meeting took place on Friday 13 th June 2014 at Mak prior to the course that run from 16 th to 20 th June 2014 in the Maklib multi-purpose computer laboratory.
The ILSC course was conducted mainly by hands-on instruction with minimal theoretical instruction. This called for full-time participation/engagement by the entire team of facilitators. Whereas each course module had two lead co-facilitators from Maklib and SLU, the rest of the team participated in providing hands-on (computer-based instruction and discussion) support to the course participants. The ILSC course was conducted in a computer laboratory because it was a practical course mainly focusing on access to, usage and management of electronic information in addition to traditional/print resources that support teaching, learning and research.
st
th
Having run the first ILSC course in June 2014, the advert for the second ILSC course was run on the SLU website and the Makerere University Directorate of Research & Graduate Training sent out the advert by email with the application link. The Library observed that the second course was attended by participants from Ethiopia, Nigeria and other countries in addition to those from the original four universities of the partnership, i.e. Makerere University (Mak)
Uganda, SLU (Sweden), Sokoine University (Tanzania), National University of Rwanda
(Rwanda) and Jomo Kenyatta University (Kenya).
Between the first and the second ILSC courses content review meetings were held virtually by email between Mak and SLU Librarians. The Maklib and SLU teams had several planning and review meetings separately and a final meeting took place on Friday 28 th August 2014 (the
Friday before the start of the course) between Maklib and SLU. At the end it was concluded that the synergies created meant that the ILSC course had one team that should be referred to as one team, no more Maklib team and SLU team.
3

From the lessons learnt from the previous ILSC course as well as the participants’ feedback of need for more hands-on practice, the second ILSC course program mainly reflected more hands-on instruction with less theoretical instruction. From the pre-course assessment and feedback on the first day of the course the participants of the second course expressed the need for more practical and interactive sessions, which was encouraging to note. The ILSC course facilitation team therefore adopted the flipped classroom (learner-centered) style by embedding more discussion and hands-on sessions as a response. It also emphasized the fact that all the facilitators had to be fully engaged to support the lead facilitators. The hands-on
(practical) nature of ILSC course necessitated that it should be conducted in a computer laboratory with stable internet connectivity because it mainly focusses on promoting access to, usage and management of electronic information in addition to traditional/print resources that support teaching, learning and research.
i.
Qualities of a good research article, critical and analytical reading ii.
Search strategies and search process iii.
International and institutional online databases (e-journals, e-books), awareness of access conditions, Document Delivery Services, etc. iv.
Other resources (print and non-print) v.
Social media, web tools for communication and collaboration vi.
Professional citing and quotation and reference management vii.
Scientific communication, open access, strategic publishing including bibliometrics
After completing the course, the participants should have acquired life-long information skills and knowledge. Specifically they will be able to: i.
Plan and perform literature searches ii.
Critically evaluate literature search results iii.
Interpret the conditions and patterns of scientific publishing including the use and limitations of bibliometric tools and methods, copyright and intellectual property rights. iv.
Apply web tools for communication and collaboration in academic work v.
Use basic functions in a reference management software to create a collection of references relevant to participants’ research topics
4.
where for example the integration of international, intercultural and global dimensions in the course,
The multi-disciplinary composition of participants’ background was used as an advantage for them to share their experiences with the rest of the group on the various course sessions. The various interdisciplinary viewpoints enriched the course participants’ contributions towards the course delivery, which enabled the facilitators to give examples and illustrations within the context of the participants’ research topics.
4

From the overall online feedback about the course evaluation provided by the course participants, the following aspects featured:
Whereas from the course evaluations all the course participants reported that their expectations of the course had been met, the sessions that were mostly mentioned to have imparted new skills and knowledge were: reference management with special mention of
Endnote, professional citing & and reference styles, presentation of research work & how to make a poster, search strategies & searching online databases, social media for academic especially use of google drive, qualities of a good research article, scholarly writing styles, critical reading, strategic publishing & bibliometrics and open access publishing.
Course participants were particularly appreciative of the spirit of cooperation exhibited among the facilitators from both Maklib and SLU. Furthermore, participants said that the unity among them encouraged learning from each other hence making use of the intercultural composition among them to leverage intercultural learning. This was clearly exhibited in the spirit of team-work when the participants were given group assignments. They ably managed to do group assignment, which eased the instructional work of the facilitators.
The diverse cultural backgrounds encouraged teamwork and appreciation of the different opinions during group discussions.
The international composition of course facilitators provided synergies and a blended teaching approach/style, which promoted learning. Similarly, both the international composition of course participants and facilitators provided a global view of concepts taught and discussed during the course; hence made participants & facilitators to reflect on the implications of globalisation to their professional work.
Furthermore, the course was a melting port for shared skills ideas and information. During group discussions and hands-on training, participants freely shared their knowledge and skills on familiar course modules/topics. This complemented the facilitators’ role, which during
5.
It is important to have a common view on how to teach and evaluate to achieve continuous improvement and shared accountability for participant learning. We also need a common understanding of the role of learning outcomes in the participants learning process which contributes to reach the goal of the course.
In order to make that happen we need to take in account how the PhD students can work together in spite of coming from different universities, with different past and future possibilities (providing opportunities) – e.g. cultural and linguistic – to continue work on the basis of acquired knowledge in the course and how we best can support that this is maintained.
It would be preferable to have more time together planning the course. That would give us an opportunity to get to know each other, map our different competences and our expectations on each other better, which in our belief would benefit the course as a whole.
When planning the course, emphasis should be on the learning outcomes for the course.
(include main challenges faced by instructors)
Facilitators learned that they belonged to one team and no longer Maklib team or SLU team.
This encouraged the sharing of tasks. The course team has been inspired by the need to extend
5

the partnership beyond the project period. The hands-on nature of the course has also reignited awareness for the need to share tasks.
Teaching in a diverse cultural and global context makes for several opportunities for in-depth learning progression. The collaboration made it possible to focus on coherent course objectives and their outcomes.
It would have been preferable with more direct collaboration in the classroom than overlapping teamwork. A suggestion is to create more frequent (online, e.g. via Skype,
Google Hangout) contact between SLU and Makerere teachers, preparing their lectures together.
The PhD students often wanted to work with hands-on after a presentation, when they could practice on their own and make experiences. Handing out information after presentations, a template or an exercise, would have fulfilled their wishes to some extent. The handouts should mirror the lectures in strengthening the doctoral students’ ability to work independently.
Another lesson learned was to reflect on the course as an ongoing professional development for both facilitators/teachers and participants where we value the stream of constant feedback and analysis, characterized by an active collaboration and communication. The course should start by going through the learning outcomes and not so much the students’ wishes or expectations. The course evaluation, then, should connect to the learning outcomes once again in order to make sure they have been met. Learning outcomes and cognitive alignment are the key concepts of teaching in higher education.
The sections where we agreed to cooperate with facilitators from both universities could be improved. A presentation does not necessarily have to be made by just one person, and the interactivity between both parts could be more responsive and reflective to show differences as well as resemblances in a global perspective.
Working methods
As a whole, this project has been a great opportunity possibility to learn from one another.
However, due to the low bandwidth at Maklib it was not possible to have virtual meeting svia skype, etc. therefore we had to limit our communications to email exchanges and the few faceface meetings at SLU and Maklib. Even with that situation we were able to establish coherence between the different parts of the course in order to implement the project. In our view, more meetings whether virtually or physically would have made it even better.
CONCLUSIVE REMARKS
The course has offered an excellent opportunity and experience to work in a global context between facilitators of Maklib and SLU libraries and with participants in various disciplines from different universities.
The complexity of the course is also what makes it important. We were given components to understand the conditions for other teaching institutions, including learning, facilities and tools.
We were also given components to sharpen our own cultural self-awareness, our ability to adapt cross-cultural coherence and understand the value of this diversity.
The PhD students´ abilities to reflect, analyse and give feedback were major aspects to be able to evolve the course and its subjects as well as our teaching. The student feedback is a necessary basis for becoming aware of their needs, both for course participants themselves and for the teachers.
6

6.
The richness of the course content calls for additional time for the most practical sessions.
This has been revealed by the feedback from the participants from both the June and
September courses. Where resources are available, the course team plans to extend the partnership beyond 2014 through a staff exchange program, running the course jointly beyond
2014 at Makerere University, SLU and other African universities as well as writing joint papers/publications.
In a tight schedule like the one we used for the course it is easy for the participants to be overwhelmed by the amount of information. The aim should be to relate classes with connecting topics to each other to achieve an even better understanding of the full context.
Aiming for the progression of the course presented in a logical order of the different subjects.
A different pedagogical approach (e.g. flipped classroom, blended learning) combined with some adjustments to the schedule could improve the opportunity for the doctoral students’ self-reflection. To name one example: instead of having a full day of lecturing about one specific reference style, an instructional film can be put up on the student web, telling how and why to use that particular style. In preparation for class, students are told to watch the film.
The contact time with the doctoral students in class can subsequently be used for hands-on exercises, where the lecturers function as a resource.
7.
An environment conducive to learning will enhance the ability to reach the learning outcomes.
Remarks could be made about the premises where it was difficult to hear, see, act, and interact for all participants due to the design of the learning environment. The computer room should only be used for sessions with hands-on activities, whereas other lectures should be taught in a room with possibilities to adjust the furniture in a flexible way. Interactive learning (i.e. discussions, group work) requires that all participants and lecturers see and hear each other.
– how has the course contributed to the capacity development at Makerere University, and if possible the students' home universities and how has it contributed to the internationalization of the doctoral education at both universities
It is proposed that course content shall be revised according to the changing user needs in a rapidly changing information environment. This will enable the course to remain relevant to researchers at the participating institutions. Participants were able to make observations at the course, which hopefully can inform information literacy programs at their home institutions.
Maklib and SLU Library have gained further international recognition for contributing to development of information competency skills and knowledge of researchers in Africa.
Additional experience has been gained by Maklib and SLU Librarians in instructional skills, which will help implement the information literacy programs both at SLU and Mak more innovatively than before.
The newly formed team of Librarians from Mak and SLU plans to sustain the collaboration through staff exchanges as well as jointly conduct similar information literacy programs in the rest of Africa in order to benefit more participants if resources are made available. The tam also hopes to conduct training of trainers’ workshops to build the capacity of Librarians in order to start and support information literacy initiatives where they exist in partnering institutions.
7

As revealed by the June course evaluation by the participants, 72% of the participants had not attended a similar course, hence the blended course content and teaching styles complemented partner university’s efforts towards globalization of their information literacy programs.
Good points to keep in mind:

Ongoing professional development
 PhD students’ learning and achievements should be reflected

Self-reflection – reflect on professional growth needs and goals

Provide opportunities for collegial/peer dialogue

Announcement and marketing of the PhD course more widely internally in the organisations as well as internationally!
A.
ATTACHMENTS a.
Schedule b.
Basic reading list / references: available online at the Maklib training platform at https://sites.google.com/site/libraryictdepartment/training-programs/trainingpage/resources c.
Names of the doctoral students that passed the course: all passed (list of participants selected by SLU project manager)
Eligible participants:
Admitted to PhD studies within food security at Makerere University, SLU, Sokoine
University of Agriculture, National University of Rwanda and Jomo Kenyatta University.
SN. NAME REG.NO d.
Names of the staff members that facilitated the course
COLLEGE
Makerere University Library contacts:
Prof. Maria Musoke mmusoke@mulib.mak.ac.ug ; maria.gnmusoke@yahoo.com
Agnes Namaganda
Caroline Kobusingye agnama@mulib.mak.ac.ug ckobs.angel@gmail.com, ckobusingye@mulib.mak.ac.ug
Andrew Mwesigwa
Liz State
Secretary
Jane Frances Alowo amwesigwa@mulib.mak.ac.ug ; andrewmwesigwa1@gmail.com
state@mulib.mak.ac.ug
universitylibrarian@mulib.mak.ac.ug janefalowo@yahoo.com
Merit Kabugo mkabugo91@gmail.com
SLU University Library contacts:
Britt Marie Bergquist
Moa Hedbrant
Charlotte Håkansson britt.marie.berquist@slu.se moa.hedbrant@slu.se charlotte.hakansson@slu.se
Nicolette Karst
Camilla Söderquist nicolette.karst@slu.se camilla.soderquist@slu.se
Linda Åström Wennbom (linda.astrom@slu.se) linda.astrom.wennbom@ki.se
Booking of guest house and transports:
Carol Mirembe mirembe@rgt.mak.ac.ug
Prof. Maria Musoke, Makerere University Charlotte Håkansson, SLU
COORDINATOR COORDINATOR
8