LSTA – LIBRARIAN AS INSTRUCTIONAL LEADER
RISING JUNIOR MINI-GRANT REPORT
Report for the Winter/Spring Authentic Assessment Mini-Grants Post to your library’s page on
http://informationliteracywactc.pbwiki.com -- Due June 17, 2011
The purpose of this report is to reflect on your learning and to create a repository of shared ideas and strategies for
Washington state community and technical college libraries.
Project Summary What did you do? (limit to 200 words)
Three psychology faculty and one reference librarian selected three psychology courses for review, improvement, and
assessment of IL. We scanned 12 psychology master course outlines and identified the IL content of each as explicit-withroom-for-improvement, or as implicit (PSYC&100, PSY110, PSYC200, PSYC205, PSY209, PSY210, PSY220, PSYC222, PSY230,
PSY245, PSY255, PSY257). We chose three courses (PSYC&100, PSYC200, PSYC222) already containing IL but with room for
further development based on the following criteria: offered Winter and Spring quarter; taught both quarters by the same
faculty member and by faculty participating in the grant.
PSYC&100 – Students were expected to attempt a basic literature review on a topic related to psychology of their
choosing. It was also expected that students would distinguish between popular-internet based searches (“non-scholarly
Google”) and scholarly database searches (databases typically found through academic libraries).
PSYC200 -- Decided to improve a current event assignment used in the past in order to meet more information literacy goals.
Also added a LibGuide (http://libguides.northseattle.edu/psychology200 ) designed for the assignment in order to assist
students in accomplishing the learning outcomes.
PSYC222 -- Students were required to locate and evaluate three online documents (very good document, a very bad
document, and a document of average quality) on one topic in Biopsychology, and then write reflections on the process.
In addition, the team developed a 13-question survey to ascertain faculty expectations of information literacy among
students. We deployed this survey to psychology faculty at the University of Washington. We also communicated with the
UW psychology undergraduate studies and advising department (http://web.psych.washington.edu/psych.php#p=330 ) to
find out whether there are formally established IL standards in the curriculum.
Participants – Who worked on this project?
Librarians: Aryana Bates
Faculty: Brian Holt, Anne Richards, Ann Voorhies
Class name(s) and approximate number of students involved:




PSYC&100 – General Psychology – Holt – Winter 2011, 16 students; Spring 2011, 25 students.
PSYC200 -- Lifespan Psychology – Richards -- Winter 2011, 20 students who completed the assignment being
assessed; Spring 2011, 22 students who completed both of the assignments being assessed. Both Lifespan classes
were online.
PSYC222 – Survey of Physiological Psychology – Voorhies – Winter 2011, 25 students; Spring 2011, 25 students.
Total number of students for three courses and two quarters = 133
1
Learning Outcomes or Project Outcomes – What did you want the students to be able to do? OR What did you intend to
accomplish?
Project Overview
Develop a sense of how IL is integrated and taught in psychology courses at North generally and in three courses specifically;
get a sense of what expectations about IL skills exist in undergraduate psychology courses at the University of Washington;
develop recommendations towards next steps for further systematic integration of IL into the psychology curriculum at
North.
PSYC&100 – General Psychology – Holt
Students were evaluated on the following (Assignment instructions are located under Pedagogy section):



The ability to evaluate different types of sources (popular vs. scholarly article)
The ability to evaluate different types of source databases (popular vs. scholarly database)
The ability to attempt a basic search strategy (Boolean, advanced search)
PSYC200 – Developmental Psychology – Richards
For the assignment I did in the lifespan psychology course I wanted students to be able to distinguish between primary and
secondary sources, distinguish between popular and scholarly resources, be able to develop and implement a search strategy
in order to find a news article and then a scholarly primary source referenced in that article, and to evaluate a popular news
article for trustworthiness.
PSYC222 – Survey of Physiological Psychology – Voorhies
I want students to be able to use the internet as a research tool, utilizing critical thinking and evaluation skills to select
relevant, appropriate sources of information.
Curriculum – What did the students need to know? What content needed to be covered?
Project Overview
We faculty needed to review psychology master course outlines; examine specific assignments in the three selected courses;
contact UW undergraduate psychology department; develop and deploy survey to UW psychology faculty; identify
recommendations for next steps in the psychology curriculum.
PSYC&100 – General Psychology – Holt
General Psychology (Psych 101), the assignment asked students to select a topic related to psychology of their choosing.
General Psychology is such a broad topic that it’s common practice for instructors to not cover an entire textbook. This
assignment offers an opportunity for students to investigate any topic in psychology that might not be covered in a particular
course.
PSYC200 – Developmental Psychology – Richards
The students needed to understand what popular and scholarly periodicals were and where to find them. They also needed
to know what a primary source was and how to find and download a primary source to go with a news article. They needed to
learn how to use search engines and the school library’s databases to find news articles and primary sources. They needed to
learn a strategy for evaluating a popular article for trustworthiness.
2
PSYC222 – Survey of Physiological Psychology – Voorhies
Students needed to be taught (or reminded) of advanced internet search functions, as well as the evaluation criteria that
would help them select relevant online documents. In class we discussed what these evaluation criteria are, and how to think
about information sources using the criteria.
Pedagogy – What were the setting and learning activities for the students to gain/develop these abilities?
Project Overview
The four team members discussed IL concepts and reviewed selected assignments for IL content and ideas for development
and assessment of IL content.
PSYC&100 – General Psychology – Holt
Online database searches using Google and research databases through the library. These searches were done outside of
class and could be done in the library or from home.
Winter 2011 assignment:
1) Find an article based on a personal interest using Google
You will begin by performing a Google search on a topic that is related to psychology. You should use the Advanced
Search Functions to narrow the number of results of the initial search.
Keep track of your search terms for each step (Eg., first search includes term “A”, second search includes Terms “A”
and “B”, and so on.
When you have narrowed your search to 5000 hits or less, make a copy of the first search page showing the search
engine (Google), the search words, and the number of hits. You should only do this for the front page (the first
page). You should not submit more than 1 page as part of your homework
To make a copy, you should be able to go to your web-browser’s file menu, select save, and save it someplace where
you can access it again. If you can only make a print out of these searches you can turn in the work in person.
2) Find an article based on a the same personal interest using scholarly database
Now, use one of the following databases to perform the same task as #1:
PsychARTICLES or Academic Search Complete.
You can find these databases on this page:
https://library.northseattle.edu/articles/alphabetical (If you access any of these databases from off campus, you will
have to use your Last name and Student ID number to obtain access).
Please follow the same steps as you did in number 1, but this time, I would like you to make a copy of the search
term results at 2 separate times. So, for example, after search for term “A”, make a copy of the first page of
results. Then once you have made your final search and narrowed your results down to just a few results, make
another copy showing your search terms and hits.
3) Select an article from your final search efforts and provide a very quick review of the abstract. In other words, in a few
sentences try to explain the article and its conclusions to someone who has not yet taken a college class in psychology.
3
Spring 2011 assignment
1) Find an article based on a personal interest using Google
You will begin by performing a Google search on a topic that is related to psychology. You should use the Advanced
Search Functions to narrow the number of results of the initial search.
Keep track of your search terms for each step (Eg., first search includes term “A”, second search includes Terms “A”
and “B”, and so on.
When you have narrowed your search to 5000 hits or less, print a copy of just the first search page showing the
search engine (Google), the search words, and the number of hits. You should only do this for the front page (the
first page). Keep track of your work below (ie, write in the following):
I need to see in your print-out the search terms and the number of hits!
A. Topic you are interested in: _________________________
Search terms used in Google (this may be the same words from above, and they may be combinations of search
terms)
Trial a) ____________________________ How many hits: ________________
Trial b) ____________________________ How many hits: ________________
Trial c) ____________________________ How many hits: ________________
B. From this search using Google, I’d like you to select 2 “articles” (or Hits) that are of opposing quality (good article
and poor article). I’d like for you then explain in a paragraph what made them good or poor--think about the quality
of the source, the information. You should type this on a separate paper.
2) Find an article based on the same personal interest using a scholarly database
Now, use one of the following databases to perform the same task as #1 using the same search terms:
PsychARTICLES or Academic Search Complete.
You can find these databases on this page: https://library.northseattle.edu/articles/alphabetical
(If you access any of these databases from off campus, you will have to use your Last name and Student ID number
to obtain access).
Please follow the same steps as you did in number 1, but this time, I would like you to make a copy of the search
term results at 2 separate times. The first time will be after searching for term “A”, and the second time will occur
once you have made your final search and narrowed your results down to just a few results.
I need to see the search terms and the number of hits in your print-out!
Like above, you can hand write in your search terms here, just to keep track:
A. Topic you are interested in: _________________________
Search terms used in the database (this may be the same words from above, and they may be combinations of
search terms)
Trial a) ____________________________ How many hits: ________________
Trial b) ____________________________ How many hits: ________________
Trial c) ____________________________ How many hits: ________________
4
3) Select an article from your last search and provide a very quick review of the abstract. In other words, in a few sentences
try to explain the article and it’s conclusions to someone who isn’t familiar with science or psychology. Please type this on a
separate piece of paper; this should also be about 1 paragraph.
4) Lastly, how does this article from the school database differ in quality from either of the articles found using Google? In
other words, using your criteria from that earlier Google search (what makes a good vs poor quality article), how would you
rate this article, and why? If you would like to revise what you consider to be good vs poor quality you should. Again, one
paragraph will be sufficient.
In the end, I expect to receive 3 printouts, and one page with 3 paragraphs of typed text.
PSYC200 – Developmental Psychology – Richards
During winter quarter I gave a version of Part 1 (below). Spring quarter I gave the assignment below to my students in its
entirety. The first part was due two weeks before the second part of the assignment.
Part 1.
A. Select a news article from a popular periodical. If you are not sure how to tell the difference between scholarly and popular
periodicals go to this website created by North’s librarian.
http://libguides.northseattle.edu/content.php?pid=197200&sid=1650351
Go to Google News or directly to the website of a newspaper or news television station. Alternatively, look in
the science or medicine section of the newspaper or news magazine you subscribe to. You must use an article
from a valid news source – not just anywhere on the web. Here are some examples below. Email me through
Angel if you are not sure if you chose an acceptable article.
www.cnn.com
www.nytimes.com
seattletimes.nwsource.com
www.washingtonpost.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/oregonian/
www.sfchron.com
Search for an article that focuses on anything related to the topics discussed in this class. You must choose a
news article that discusses the results of one or more scientific studies (making the article a secondary source). If
you are searching online you will need to decide what topics you are interested in so that you can narrow your
search. For example, if you wanted to find an article about Autism then you will be more likely to find it if you
search for the word “autism” than if you search for “Developmental Psychology” or “developmental disorders”.
B. Read the article and type the answers to the following questions. The questions will be graded based on whether you
answered every question clearly and completely, with thought, using complete sentences.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
What is the title of the article? Does the title or headline give a good general description of the article or not?
Think of an alternate title or headline that is possibly more accurate.
What is the name of the author of the article or the organization it is from? (example: Associated Press) If you
can’t find either of these then use a different article.
What is the full link and title of the source of the news article (title of newspaper, website address)?
What is the date of the article?
Give a summary of the article (one to two paragraphs). Describe the study that the article is about. What did the
study find? What were the conclusions the article made based on the study findings? What evidence or
5
6.
7.
examples does the article use to support the conclusions?
Come up with three questions that you had about the study after reading the article.
Rate how much you trust and believe the conclusions that the article came to from 1 (I don’t trust the article at
all) to 5 (I completely trust the article).
Part 2.
Find the primary source of one of the studies your news article discussed and do the following things.
A.
B.
C.
D.
In order to understand what a primary source is please go to this webpage.
http://libguides.northseattle.edu/content.php?pid=197200&sid=1650352
1. What is a primary source?
Search for the primary source online using a database. The links to the databases are here. The easiest
way to find the article is to search for the author, year of publication, and/or name of the Journal it is
published in. One or more of these should be cited in the news article.
http://libguides.northseattle.edu/content.php?pid=197200&sid=1650350
Once you find the article download it. Make sure to turn in this file with your written assignment.
Answer each of the three questions you came up with in Part 1 using the primary source.
Has your opinion of the news article changed now that you have more information? For the second time, rate how much you
trust and believe the conclusions that the article came to from 1(I don’t trust the article at all) to 5 (I completely trust the
article).
PSYC222 – Survey of Physiological Psychology – Voorhies
In order to build the necessary evaluation skills to use the internet effectively, students completed an independent written
assignment on the experience of using the internet to locate research sources. Students were required to locate three online
documents on one topic in Biopsychology. They were instructed to use their instincts to pick a very good document, a very
bad document, and a document of average quality. Once they had these documents, they identified the sources, and used
five evaluative criteria (credibility, point of view, accuracy, currency and relevance) to score the documents. They then gave
3-5 sentences of explanation for each score. Finally, they summarized the experience in 2-4 paragraphs, noting how well they
did with their instincts about the documents, what the experience was like, and what they learned about using the internet as
a research tool.
Difference between quarters: For the Spring 2011 assignment, I included specific details on using the advance search
function in Google, including how to exclude terms from a search. In addition, the wording was changed from "articles" to
"online documents" to be more inclusive of all potential sources on the internet (as this assignment does not require one
specific type of document). The assignment format was also changed, to spell out exactly what was required, in a numbered,
easy-to-follow list. These instructions were in the previous version of the assignment, but not gathered into one concise list
to walk students through what they should do, and the order in which to do it.
Winter 2011 -- Internet Research Assignment
The internet is a powerful tool for scientists. With a click or two, we can search for any topic, learn what other scientists are
thinking and explore new areas of knowledge. This is an excellent resource, but there is also a down side. Unlike scientific
journal publications, the internet does not judge the quality of work produced or the validity of the conclusions drawn. In
addition, quantity does not always equal quality. Some sites may have a lot of information presented in a beautiful, easy-toread format. This means very little about the actual quality of that information.
One of our jobs as scientists is to develop critical evaluation skills. We need to be able to distinguish between valid research
and propaganda, between science and junk. It’s all out there; our job is to tell the difference between the good, the bad, and
the ugly.
6
COMPUTER SEARCH
Step 1: Choose a topic of interest to you in biopsychology. It may be a disease, an interesting behavior or a new area of
research. See the list below for possible ideas. If you are unsure of your choice or need some help, please talk to me.
Step 2: Search this topic on the internet. Google is a great search engine in the sciences, but you may use another if you like.
During your search, use the advanced search features to narrow your search. When you have narrowed your topic to 5000
hits or less, print the search page showing the search engine, search words and number of hits. Just the first page will do as
long as it does contain all three pieces of required information. (Hint: if you have too few hits – less than 20 – you will have a
hard time with Step 3.)
Step 3: Choose three articles from this search – they do not need to be ones that showed up on the first page that you printed
for Step 2 above, but they do need to be articles that are found somewhere in your 1000 or less hits. Try for a junk article, a
strong science article, and one somewhere in the middle. Go with your gut instinct on hitting these parameters, you will find
out soon enough how well you did! Keep in mind the search parameters you entered, and choose articles that have some
relevance to the topic for which you were searching. In addition, you must have access to the entire article; no abstracts or
advertisements for books.
Step 4: Print the three articles.
EVALUATION OF SITES
There are five different criteria that are immensely helpful for evaluation of an internet site: Credibility, Point of view,
Accuracy, Currency, and Relevance. Each of these criteria has “flags” or items to look for in deciding whether this is a good
scientific site or junk science. Use the attached comprehensive definitions of the criteria to understand these “flags” and how
to use them to score each criterion.
For each of the three articles you chose, decide on a score for each of these 5 criteria (again, see the attached information to
help you in scoring). Include an explanation for your reasoning - why did you give each article its score? This explanation
should be 3-5 sentences in length and should describe how well (or poorly) the article fulfills that criterion. Repeat this
evaluation for each article. You will have a total of 15 scores (5 criteria x 3 articles) with several sentences of explanation for
each score.
Finally, write an overall summary (2 to 4 paragraphs) reviewing your research results. Compare the scores of the three
articles, discussing your overall findings and noting how you did with your “gut instinct” when you first chose the articles. In
addition, address what you learned about the process of searching for information on the internet.
Staple together the entire packet containing (in this order, please):




Your evaluation of each article (formatted like the template below)
Your research summary
The search page
The three articles (first 1-2 pages of each)
This project is worth 40 points, as follows:


30 points – evaluation of articles (10 points/article)
10 points – summary of research & printed search page
Topic ideas






Stem cell therapies for brain damage or disease
Alzheimer’s vaccine
Effects of sports-related repetitive head injuries
Deep-brain stimulation
Brain plasticity following early damage
Effects of enriched or impoverished environments
7













Damage or brain abnormalities seen in one of the following: Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, Autism, Schizophrenia,
Huntington’s, Epilepsy, Depression, Dyslexia, other…
Language acquisition in hearing and/or deaf children
Role of sleep in memory consolidation
Neurological changes resulting from pregnancy
Neurological changes supporting drug sensitization
Pharmacological treatment of PTSD
Cochlear implants
Drug laws/legalization
Gender identity
“Brain food” for improved cognitive performance
Animal use in biomedical research
Lobotomy
Electro-convulsive therapy
EVALUATION CRITERIA: When scoring each of the following criteria, use a scale of 1 – 5 in which:
1 = poor, 2 = fair, 3 = average, 4 = good, and 5 = excellent.
Credibility: Credibility is based on the credentials of the author(s) and the site itself. Ask:





Who is the author? Is the author affiliated with a governmental or academic institution or industry, or is the author
writing in his/her basement?
Do the credentials seem believable? Are the credentials adequate for the claims made?
What is the URL? (.edu, .gov, .com, .org or other). How does this affect credibility?
Does the footer have an email address to contact?
Does the page contain references to other scientific work and links to important publications noted in the article?
Point of View: Authors often have an agenda or are trying to sell something. Other times, an author with an ax to grind will
set up a web site easily recognizable to the search engine. The main things to look for in evaluating point of view are:





Have you heard of the author and/or organization? (be careful of sound-alike names)
Is the purpose to sell a product or a subscription?
Does the author/organization have an agenda? (All agendas aren’t “bad,” but should be recognized)
What values are expressed in this article?
Is there conflicting or missing data?
Accuracy: This is a very important criterion for scientists, who depend on accurate data to get a clear picture of what is being
studied. This is also one of the easiest to evaluate:





Are there verifiable factual statements?
Are other works/studies cited? Are these cited works credible?
Is evidence described?
Are there footnotes?
Are there links to primary documents, such as papers in peer-reviewed scientific journals?
Currency: The timeliness of the information is a valuable tool for evaluation of a site or article. Some sites are established and
then left alone without updating. Sites that have been floating in cyberspace without attention for two or three years are
worthless to a scientist looking for current information.



Is there a copyright or creation date for the site? (It is often in the header or footer).
When was this site last updated?
Are the links still accurate? (Outdated links indicate a poorly maintained site).
Relevance: This is the criterion that that requires the most opinion by the reader. Each person must evaluate how relevant
8
the information presented is to his/her research and to the intended audience. Look for:



Does the site reach the intended audience?
Is it comprehensive enough? (Or are you left asking questions about central ideas?)
Is the information valuable to your question? Could you use this information to help you write a research paper on
the subject?
(Adapted from an assignment by A. Sessions.)
ASSIGNMENT TEMPLATE
Name _________________________
Article #1: Article name, retrieval date, website URL.
Credibility
Score: _____
Reasoning:
Point of view
Score: _____
Reasoning:
Accuracy
Score: _____
Reasoning:
Currency
Score: _____
Reasoning:
Relevance
Score: _____
Reasoning:
Article #1 total score: ______
(Repeat for articles 2 and 3.)
Research summary
Spring 2011 -- Internet Research Assignment
The internet is a powerful tool for scientists. With a few clicks we can search for any topic, learn what other scientists are
thinking and explore new areas of knowledge. This is an excellent resource, but there is a dark side: unlike scientific journal
publications, there are no controls over the quality of work posted online or the validity of the conclusions drawn. In addition,
quantity does not always equal quality. Some online documents may have a lot of information presented in a beautiful, easy9
to-read format. This means very little about the actual quality of that information.
One of our jobs as scientists is to develop critical evaluation skills. We need to be able to distinguish between valid research
and propaganda, between science and pseudoscience. It’s all out there; our job is to distinguish between the good, the bad,
and the truly horrible.
Topic ideas



















Stem cell therapies for brain damage or disease
Alzheimer’s vaccine
Effects of sports-related repetitive head injuries
Deep-brain stimulation
Brain plasticity following early damage
Effects of enriched or impoverished environments
Damage or brain abnormalities seen in one of the following: Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, Autism, Schizophrenia,
Huntington’s, Epilepsy, Depression, Dyslexia, other…
Language acquisition in hearing and/or deaf children
Role of sleep in memory consolidation
Neurological changes resulting from pregnancy
Neurological changes supporting drug sensitization
Pharmacological treatment of PTSD
Cochlear implants
Drug laws/legalization
Gender identity
“Brain food” for improved cognitive performance
Animal use in biomedical research
Lobotomy
Electro-convulsive therapy
COMPUTER SEARCH
Step 1: Choose a topic of interest to you in biopsychology. It may be a disease, an interesting behavior or a new area of
research. See the list above for possible ideas. If you are unsure of your choice or need some help, please talk to me.
Step 2: Search this topic on the internet. Google is a great search engine in the sciences, but you may use another if you like.
During your search, use the advanced search features to narrow your search. (Hint: identify common “wrong” words that
appear in your initial search – terms you are specifically not looking for – to exclude using the advanced search function.)
When you have narrowed your topic to 5000 hits or less, print the search page showing the search engine, search words and
number of hits. Just the first page will do as long as it does contain all three pieces of required information. (Hint: if you have
too few hits – less than 20 – you will have a hard time with Step 3.)
Step 3: Choose three documents (e.g. newspaper article, blog post, scholarly article, etc.) from this search – they do not need
to be hits that showed up on the first page that you printed for Step 2 above, but they do need to be documents that are
found somewhere in your 5000 or less hits. Try for a junk document, a strong science document, and one somewhere in the
middle. Go with your gut instinct on hitting these parameters, you will find out soon enough how well you did! Keep in mind
the search parameters you entered, and choose documents that have some relevance to the topic for which you were
searching. In addition, you must have access to the entire document; no abstracts or advertisements for books.
Step 4: Print the three documents.
EVALUATION OF DOCUMENTS (Adapted from an assignment by A. Sessions.)
There are five different criteria that are quite helpful for evaluation of an online document: Credibility, Point of view,
Accuracy, Currency, and Relevance. Each of these criteria has “flags” or items to look for in deciding whether this is a good
scientific document or junk science. Use the following criteria to understand these “flags” and use them to score each
10
criterion.
EVALUATION CRITERIA: When scoring each of the following criteria, use a scale of 1 – 5 in which:
1 = poor, 2 = fair, 3 = average, 4 = good, and 5 = excellent.
Credibility: Credibility is based on the credentials of the author(s) and the online document itself. Ask:





Who is the author? Is the author affiliated with a governmental or academic institution or industry, or is the author
writing in his/her basement?
Do the credentials seem believable? Are the credentials adequate for the claims made?
What is the URL? (.edu, .gov, .com, .org or other). How does this affect credibility?
Does the footer have an email address to contact?
Does the page contain references to other scientific work and links to important publications noted in the
document?
Point of View: Authors often have an agenda or are trying to sell something. Other times, an author with an ax to grind will
set up a web online document easily recognizable to the search engine. The main things to look for in evaluating point of view
are:





Have you heard of the author and/or organization? (be careful of sound-alike names)
Is the purpose to sell a product or a subscription?
Does the author/organization have an agenda? (All agendas aren’t “bad,” but should be recognized)
What values are expressed in this document?
Is there conflicting or missing data?
Accuracy: This is a very important criterion for scientists, who depend on accurate data to get a clear picture of what is being
studied. This is also one of the easiest to evaluate:





Are there verifiable factual statements?
Are other works/studies cited? Are these cited works credible?
Is evidence described?
Are there footnotes?
Are there links to primary documents, such as papers in peer-reviewed scientific journals?
Currency: The timeliness of the information is a valuable tool for evaluation of a online document or document. Some online
documents are established and then left alone without updating. Online documents that have been floating in cyberspace
without attention for two or three years are worthless to a scientist looking for current information.



Is there a copyright or creation date for the online document? (It is often in the header or footer).
When was this online document last updated?
Are the links still accurate? (Outdated links indicate a poorly maintained online document).
Relevance: This is the criterion that that requires the most opinion by the reader. Each person must evaluate how relevant
the information presented is to his/her research and to the intended audience. Look for:



Does the online document reach the intended audience?
Is it comprehensive enough? (Or are you left asking questions about central ideas?)
Is the information valuable to your question? Could you use this information to help you write a research paper on
the subject?
ASSIGNMENT FORMAT
Assignments should be typed in 12pt font, and 1.5 spaced. Please include a header with your name and topic. Use the
attached template to format your evaluation of each document, and staple together your entire packet in the following
order:
11
1. For each document list the name, type of resource it is, retrieval date, and URL. Next, give the document a score for each of
these 5 criteria (again, see the criteria information to help you in scoring). Include an explanation for your reasoning - why did
you give each document its score? This explanation should be 3-5 sentences in length and should describe how well (or
poorly) the document fulfills that criterion. Add up the 5 scores for the document.
2. Repeat this evaluation for the second and third documents. You will have a total of 15 scores (5 criteria x 3 documents)
with several sentences of explanation for each score.
3. Write an overall summary (2 to 4 paragraphs) reviewing your research results. Compare the scores of the three documents,
note how you did with your “gut instinct” when you first chose the documents – which document was originally the best? the
worst? - and address what you learned about the process of searching for information on the internet. In addition, discuss
what you learned about your topic.
4. Include a printout of the search page (only the first page).
5. Include the first page of each of the three documents, in the order that they were evaluated.
This project is worth 40 points, as follows:


30 points – evaluation of documents (10 points/document)
10 points – summary of research & printed search page
ASSIGNMENT TEMPLATE
Name _________________________ Topic _______________________
Document #1: Document name, document type, retrieval date, URL.
Credibility
Score: _____
Reasoning:
Point of view
Score: _____
Reasoning:
Accuracy
Score: _____
Reasoning:
Currency
Score: _____
Reasoning:
Relevance
Score: _____
Reasoning:
Document #1 total score: ______
12
(Repeat for documents 2 and 3.)
Research summary
Assessment – How did you assess your project outcomes? What data did you collect? How well did you meet your outcomes?
Project Overview
For the project as a whole, we assessed the extent to which we met our intended outcomes. The best result is around the
assignment specific work conducted in the three courses. Three assignments in three psychology courses were deployed over
two quarters, with modifications to the IL content between deployments, and assessments conducted on the same
assignments both quarters. Specifics of the assignment level assessment are listed below.
Evaluation of the psychology master course outlines was done at a basic level. MCOs were sorted between those that exhibit
IL explicitly and those that implicitly include IL.
Development of connections with the undergraduate psychology department and faculty at the University of Washington was
less thorough than hoped. Communication with department staff provided sufficient information about the general nature of
IL expectations within the department. Results of the survey seeking more detailed information from faculty was marginally
useful, with only two respondents, one of whom is a member of this grant project.
PSYC&100 – General Psychology – Holt
Students were instructed to make screen-prints of their searches at various steps, as well as comment on what makes a
“good quality” article vs. a “poor quality” article. Using a rubric on 3 dimensions, student assignments were rated as “Needing
work, “Good”, and “Excellent.” The 3 dimensions were:
o
o
o
Distinguish between primary and secondary sources *(see note)
Distinguish between popular and scholarly sources
Develop and implement a search strategy
Note: Students were not instructed to distinguish between primary and secondary sources, though many students did and so
it was possible to assess.
PSYC200 – Developmental Psychology – Richards
I counted the number of students who were able to identify a popular resource during winter quarter and compared that to
the number who were able to identify a popular resource in the spring quarter to see if ability to distinguish between primary
and secondary resource improved using the new library guide website. In the first part of the assignment they learned and
had to look up the difference between scholarly and popular and then choose a popular news article. I counted how many of
them used a popular article for the first part. In the second part they had to look up what a primary source was on the
research guide and then find one of the primary sources from their news article.
I found that 18 out of 20 students in the winter course successfully found a popular news article. Twenty-one out of 22
students in the spring course successfully found a popular news article; a small increase. This shows that most of the students
understand the difference between a popular and scholarly article. I also counted the number of people who were able to
find a scholarly article for their primary source. Eighteen out of the 21 people who turned in this part of the assignment did
find a scholarly article that was the primary source of the study they read about in the news article. This shows that in most
cases we met the outcome of the students being able to search a database to find a scholarly article and the outcome of
understanding what a primary article is. I compared a rating of trustworthiness before and after reading the primary scholarly
source for the news article to see if they were able to use the information to evaluate the article. Twelve out of 18 students
13
changed their rating of trustworthiness after doing part 2 of the assignment and several students mentioned that they
understood the article a lot better after looking at the primary source. We were mostly successful at giving students a tool to
evaluate trustworthiness of a news article and helping them understand the value of going to the primary source.
PSYC222 – Survey of Physiological Psychology – Voorhies
The assignment was assessed in terms of completion and quality of responses on the project. Students earned up to 40
points, based on identification of sources, quality of explanations for each criteria score they assigned, and quality of the
summary written about their experience with the assignment. I collected qualitative data about what elements of the
assignment students had trouble with, and compared this between groups completing the assignment in Winter 2011 and
Spring 2011. Based on some difficulties experienced during Winter 2011, I made several changes to the assignment.
The "difficulties" seen in previous quarters were primarily organizational in nature. Students were rather good at locating
excellent, moderate, and terrible documents online, but then had trouble presenting their findings in an organized
report. For instance, students did not always identify their topic, often failed to list their sources, and did not always
understand how they were to compare the documents in the final summary. As mentioned above, the instructions were
revised in the spring 2011 version to walk students through what to do and how to organize their information in their
reports. (See ASSIGNMENT FORMAT in the spring 2011 assignment.) As a result, almost every student turned in a very wellorganized report, and did a much better job reflecting on what they learned from the experience of searching for, and
evaluating, the online documents.
Students completing the (updated) assignment in Spring 2011 did not demonstrate the difficulties seen in Winter 2011. The
overall grades on the assignment were excellent, and –qualitatively- students showed great insight in their reflection on the
experience.
Data – What other data did you collect?
Project Overview
UW undergraduate psychology department does not have a separate IL goal, but IL is embedded in the five learning goals of
the department (http://www.psych.uw.edu/psych.php#p=49 ), especially in the Communication and the Methods goals.
Most courses have specific learning goals, listed by course, e.g. Psych209 (http://www.psych.uw.edu/psych.php#p=63 .
The survey (see survey at end of this section) we deployed to UW psychology faculty had limited results. We deployed the
survey via email one time, and got two responses one of which was from a member of our own grant team. It may have been
useful to deploy the survey a second time, and perhaps in a different format. The low response rate together with the fact
that IL is not a separate learning goal for UW confirms that IL is not an explicit focus area at this particular 4-year institution.
Our IL related work should proceed on the assumption that IL is expected but not explicitly articulated.
PSYC&100 – General Psychology – Holt
Overall, the first assignment led to students performing poorly. Of the 16 students, nearly half of the students failed
to follow directions. The most common mistake was to not search for the same topic using popular (google)
searches and scholarly (library) searches. Of the 3 dimensions in the rubric, none of the students performed at an
“Excellent” level, and if the students followed directions, with the exception of 4 students they performed at the
lower level of “Needing Work.”
The second assignment led to better outcomes. Students were much more thoughtful about what makes a good
quality article or not, and their search attempts were consistent across different databases (popular internet vs
scholarly database). Only 3 of the 24 students failed to follow all of the instructions. Most of the students performed
at a “Good” level of ability on each of the 3 dimensions. A few students performed at the “excellent” level.
14
Students didn’t completely understand the point of differentiating “poor” from “good” articles. Some of the
students focused on the clarity of writing or the absence of opinions as a good source without mention to whether
articles were peer reviewed, whether they included primary source material (provided experimental evidence for
conclusions), or whether the author had other professional credibility. Though clarity of writing is important, the
evaluation of a source ought to include Credibility, Point of View, Accuracy, Currency, and Relevance.
Ironically, a few students thought that internet searches were a better search tool than the scholarly databases
because the results from the internet tended to be easier to read (e.g., they lacked jargon and/or provided concrete
examples).
PSYC200 – Developmental Psychology – Richards
The students in my on-campus Lifespan Psychology class also did this assignment but the analysis and grading for that class is
not finished at this time. One impression I have so far is that students in the on-campus class did not read the instructions as
well so they did not answer some of the questions that I did not specifically talk about when I told them about the assignment
in class.
PSYC222 – Survey of Physiological Psychology – Voorhies
I have grades for the two groups of students; however, the average grades were very similar. The biggest difference between
the two groups was qualitative, and not necessarily reflected in the assigned grades.
Survey deployed to UW psychology faculty:
Teacher expectations of students' information literacy: Requirements for effective teaching
Question 1.
Please indicate the level of ONE class that you teach at the University of Washington on a regular basis. (You will be asked
about additional classes below.)
100-level
200-level
300-level
400-level
Graduate level
Question 2.
Please indicate which information literacy skills you expect students to have previously developed before taking the class
indicated in question 1. (Select all that apply.)
To be successful in this class, a student should be able to:
Define problems/develop research questions/establish independent inquiries.
15
Identify the information needed to address a question/problem.
Distinguish and appropriately select different types of information research tools (periodical databases, library catalogs,
online subject indexes, etc.)
Distinguish and select appropriate information sources (research articles, scholarly books, primary documents or data
sets, etc.)
Critically evaluate the information source/explain its value and reason for use.
Analyze the content of an information source to derive meaning and answer questions.
Compare and relate information from different information sources.
Form conclusions about the information.
Present information accurately, in written, oral, or visual form.
Credit sources correctly and consistently.
Evaluate his/her own research strategies and objectives.
Question 3.
If applicable, please indicate the level of a second class that you teach at the University of Washington on a regular basis.
100-level
200-level
300-level
400-level
Graduate level
Question 4.
Please indicate which information literacy skills you expect students to have previously developed before taking the class
indicated in question 3. (Select all that apply.)
To be successful in this class, a student should be able to:
Define problems/develop research questions/establish independent inquiries.
Identify the information needed to address a question/problem.
16
Distinguish and appropriately select different types of information research tools (periodical databases, library catalogs,
online subject indexes, etc.)
Distinguish and select appropriate information sources (research articles, scholarly books, primary documents or data
sets, etc.)
Critically evaluate the information source/explain its value and reason for use.
Analyze the content of an information source to derive meaning and answer questions.
Compare and relate information from different information sources.
Form conclusions about the information.
Present information accurately, in written, oral, or visual form.
Credit sources correctly and consistently.
Evaluate his/her own research strategies and objectives.
Question 5.
If applicable, please indicate the level a third class that you teach at the University of Washington on a regular basis.
100-level
200-level
300-level
400-level
Graduate level
Question 6.
Please indicate which information literacy skills you expect students to have previously developed before taking the class
indicated in question 5. (Select all that apply.)
To be successful in this class, a student should be able to:
Define problems/develop research questions/establish independent inquiries.
Identify the information needed to address a question/problem.
Distinguish and appropriately select different types of information research tools (periodical databases, library catalogs,
online subject indexes, etc.)
17
Distinguish and select appropriate information sources (research articles, scholarly books, primary documents or data
sets, etc.)
Critically evaluate the information source/explain its value and reason for use.
Analyze the content of an information source to derive meaning and answer questions.
Compare and relate information from different information sources.
Form conclusions about the information.
Present information accurately, in written, oral, or visual form.
Credit sources correctly and consistently.
Evaluate his/her own research strategies and objectives.
Question 7.
Specifically, do you expect students to be able to understand and evaluate scientific journal articles? If yes, please indicate at
which course level(s) you expect this. (Select all that apply.)
Do not expect students to understand and evaluate scientific journal articles.
Expect this at the 100-level
Expect this at the 200-level
Expect this at the 300-level
Expect this at the 400-level
Question 8.
Please comment on your specific use of scientific journal articles in your course, and your expectations of students regarding
reading, understanding and evaluating those articles.
Question 9.
In what areas do your typical students demonstrate competent information literacy? (Specify class level, as appropriate.)
Question 10.
In what areas have you identified a need for increased information literacy preparation? (Specify class level, as appropriate.)
Question 11.
Do you intentionally incorporate information literacy criteria into your assignments? If so, what are some examples?
18
Question 12.
Do you incorporate research training into your curriculum? If so, what are some examples?
Question 13.
Please comment on any other specific information literacy expectations that you have for your students. (Specify class level,
as appropriate.)
0fd0de666d3336
Questions or Comments?
Contact Ann Voorhies at anncv@u.washington.edu
Best Practices – What Best Practice would you pass on to other librarians or discipline faculty? What worked well? What
would you do differently?
Project Overview
Best practices might include: 1) As a department, scaffold IL into introductory courses; 2) individual instructors make a habit
of checking with students re: IL training, with the hope (but not assumption) that 200 level students will have had basic IL
training in 100 level courses, and so further IL work can proceed at a more advanced level.
PSYC&100 – General Psychology – Holt
Review instructions with multiple instructors or librarians before releasing assignment. Include rubric with the instructions as
a way to teach Information literacy material. Have at least 2 IL assignments in the course so that instructors can identify and
correct weaknesses in student search strategies. Despite computers having memory for recording previous searches, a basic
pencil and paper log of search terms really helps students organize their searches.
PSYC200 – Developmental Psychology – Richards
The Best Practice I would pass on would be to make sure to have libraries and faculty available to help students since many of
them are not able to find the primary source on their own. One example of something that worked really well was that a lot
of the students noticed and commented that they didn’t seem to have enough information in the news article to be able to
assess its trustworthiness. Therefore adding the second part of the assignment where they look up the primary source
worked very well and made sense to most them.
There are several things I will do differently next time. I will require the students to find the primary source for the first part
of the assignment so that the students won’t be able to wait until the night before it is due when they can’t get help finding it
at the library or order an article our library doesn’t have access to. I would also change the library guide website to emphasize
how to look up which journals our library has full access to and then show them how to get an article that isn’t accessible
from our own library database. I would also spend more time in the beginning helping students understand the types of
questions that will help them assess the trustworthiness of the news article better. Many students had to redo their
questions from part 1 because their original questions about the news article were not relevant to the assignment.
19
PSYC222 – Survey of Physiological Psychology – Voorhies
Requiring students to use metacognitive skills – thinking about their own thought processes – worked very well. Students
were instructed to use their “gut instinct” in selecting the articles, and were then asked to reflect on how well they had done,
after analyzing the articles according to the evaluation criteria guidelines. Although this assignment does not necessarily
introduce students to every form of available information, it does get them thinking about how they find and select
information from the breadth available on the internet.
Key learning – What’s your observation or reflection on this project? What did you or the faculty member learn from this
project?
Project Overview
Recommended next steps for systematic integration of IL into NSCC psychology curriculum:




Targeted introduction of research resources, research guides and IL integration options, and Librarians to new
faculty
Pedagogy tips sheet provided digitally to new faculty, including IL assignment examples, Library tools
Program Review/Accreditation – as Master Course Outlines come up for evaluation, focus on emphasizing/clarifying
IL content
Strategically integrate IL in progressive courses (from PSYCH100-200 level courses), to establish and build upon
foundational skills
PSYC&100 – General Psychology – Holt
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Instructions can make or break an assignment.
I was struck that so many students chose “Freud” as a topic. Freud isn’t so much a topic as a name that refers to
several other concepts that seemed more likely to pique student interest: why we dream, what does it mean to be
conscious, how much free will do I have in my life, does childhood experience influence or determine personality,
etc. Searching for Freud leads to very muddled search results, and a small adjustment in the instructions would help
students in their search attempt.
Having students first reflect on what they think is a “good” or “poor” article is helpful in diagnosing/assessing how
students approach a lit review. For example, many students ranked “clarity of writing” as important in their
descriptions without mentioning at all the importance of “peer-review”.
Giving a rubric as apart of the instructions is helpful for students who are new to literature reviews.
Having students create a log of search terms and search combinations also appeared to help students find topics that
related to their initial interest. For example, the first group of students in Winter quarter, 2011, actually would
change their topic completely based on how the difficulty in pursuing their topic. In other words, students began
with a broad topic but were unable to narrow their searches enough to find an answer to a specific question. So,
instead of persisting with the topic, they just changed topics.
PSYC200 – Developmental Psychology – Richards
Reflecting on this project I learned a lot that I will be able to use in future classes. I had not done an assignment where
students used the library website and databases before partly because I was unfamiliar with the way things work at this
school. I learned how to use our school’s system myself and made a contact with the librarian in charge of social sciences.
Since I knew that I had support from the other people on the project I felt comfortable trying a more ambitious IL assignment
this time. I also learned that it makes more sense to try a new assignment for the first time in only one section. I was a little
overwhelmed because of some of the problems I hadn’t anticipated and it would have been easier to work out the major
issues in one section first before adopting the assignment in all my sections. I also learned that a lot of the students found this
20
assignment valuable and they were willing to learn how to do something they had not done before.
PSYC222 – Survey of Physiological Psychology – Voorhies
This assignment is a good reminder about how underprepared students are to use the internet effectively. Despite having
grown up with it (for the most part), students have very little awareness of how to distinguish between “good” and “bad”
sources, or even that such distinctions exist.
21