Alison Downey, Assistant Professor of LIbrary Science at Valparaiso University
Holly Cross, Assistant Professor of Psychology at Valparaiso University
Abbie Thompson, Assistant Professor of Psychology at Valparaiso University
In the summer of 2022, a librarian and 2 psychology faculty at Valparaiso University, a small liberal arts college, created a hybrid embedded IL intervention for introductory psychology courses to cover a broad range of research skills while limiting alterations to the existing course schedule. This model supports the Association of College and Research Libraries’ (ACRL) Framework for Information Literacy in Higher Education with extensive collaboration between librarians and subject faculty. The goal of this initiative was to develop a curriculum, covering multiple facets of IL, that could be integrated into any current introductory psychology class without significant alterations to class content while expanding beyond the traditional one-shot model, in addition to,increasing students’ IL proficiencies. The IL intervention included: a set of online micro lessons, a classroom activity addressing authority and evaluation of potential misinformation, and a scaffolded semester-long project on gathering, evaluating and disseminating psychological research. Though content creation and collaboration required more time and effort at the beginning of the initiative, the outcome can be used in future semesters with few modifications. At both the start and completion of the semester, the control courses, and the 2 embedded IL courses, were administered self-assessment surveys and objective, quantitative post-test of IL knowledge and skills. Results from the pilot semester indicated that students participating in the intervention felt more confident in their research abilities, understanding of IL, and comfort working with the psychology librarian. This article will review the intervention and curriculum that was developed, feedback from students, address pitfalls and hurdles of integrating IL, and share lessons learned on how this model can be integrated in introductory psychology courses at other universities.
In academic libraries, most information literacy (IL) instruction is limited to a 60 minute, or less, one-shot session. Within that one hour session, librarians and subject faculty are required to make difficult decisions about what is most appropriate and useful for students to learn. Lower level courses are especially difficult due to a diverse range of students’ familiarity with research and skill level. The one-shot model also does not promote a scaffolded approach to research throughout the semester or throughout a particular course, and limits the time librarians have to build relationships and trust among students.
At Valparaiso University, a small liberal arts college in the Midwest, three faculty members, a librarian and two psychology faculty, decided to address this issue. The American Psychological Association (APA) guidelines for undergraduate psychology majors indicates that students need to “demonstrate psychology information literacy” (APA, 2013). This is in line with the scientific thinking goals of the APA’s introductory psychology initiative student learning outcomes for introductory psychology (APA, 2021). These guidelines work in harmony with Association of College and Research Libraries’ (ACRL) Framework for Information Literacy through the lens of collaboration and communication across departments. Prior efforts have already been published on how to integrate IL into the psychology undergraduate curriculum; much of these efforts have focused on how to summarize, evaluate and incorporate psychological sources and research. Other aspects of IL, such as: locating relevant scholarship, understanding the value of different information sources, and evaluating research in terms of bias and authority, are also integral to a more comprehensive understanding of research. Though one-shot IL sessions still aim to improve research skills and understanding, a librarian having a more present role in the curriculum would allow for students with varying experience in research to develop new skills at their own pace. Therefore, a 12-week hybrid embedded IL intervention was created to cover important topics promoting the ACRL’s Framework, as well as content deemed necessary by the subject instructors for a general psychology course. This method promoted a balanced approach between bibliographic skills and IL skills. The hybrid module of this curriculum promoted IL and library instruction in an easy-to-implement manner supported by subject faculty without drawing away from their time to teach subject content in the course.
In 2016, the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) adopted the formative guidance titled the Framework for Information Literacy in Higher Education. This framework was developed to guide instruction librarians of core concepts that are vital to developing information literate students in higher education (ACRL, 2016). The Framework transitioned away from the traditional method of skill building in instructional settings, and refocused on concept building. Specifically, the Framework defines IL as “the set of integrated abilities encompassing the reflective discovery of information, the understanding of how information is produced and valued, and the use of information to create new knowledge and participating ethically in communities of learning” (ACRL, 2016, p. 26). Though moving away from traditional skill building, it is not uncommon for subject faculty to continue to desire incorporation of research skills within IL sessions.
The most common method of library instruction is the one-shot model. In this model, librarians generally meet with a class once per semester, usually for about an hour. In that hour, librarians attempt to cover the subject instructor’s desired lesson plan, while also introducing students to the related concepts of IL (Mery, Newby & Peng, 2012; Morin, 2021; Tomaszewski, 2021). As stated in Buchanan & McDonough’s (2021) third edition of The One-Shot Library Instruction Survival Guide, noticeable limitations exist within the one-shot model, “Critics of one-shot instruction are leery of the generic library orientation or tour, which fits more into the traditional category of bibliographic instruction rather than information literacy instruction” (p. 2). Often this results in the class sessions that are overfilled with content and leave little time for students to engage in a more active learning model. As stated by Miyaoke, Toolsidass and Magee (2023), “Students may struggle to retain concepts in a one-shot session, but multiple library sessions throughout the semester allow for deeper and better understanding of research methods” (p.172).
An additional method of teaching information literacy in a subject course is to embed it within the coursework. The embedded model allows for students to better prepare for IL sessions and reduces the time spent on more introductory, or “pre-work” information, and aides in maximizing the time the librarian has with the students to focus on active learning tasks, or incorporating concepts of the IL framework (Brooke & Wiebe, 2017; Gross, Julien & Latham, 2022; Squibb & Mikkelsen, 2016; van Beem & Becker, 2015). In some cases, subject faculty will grant access to the course management software so librarians can interact with students via discussions, quizzes and assigning pre-work. Instead of students meeting the librarian one time, and possibly not seeing the same librarian until years later, if at all, this embedded model permits librarians to build stronger rapport with students to help them “learn more deeply from someone with whom they have a human connection” (Oehrli, 2022, p. 40).
Dividing up research skills and IL concepts through scaffolded pedagogy is a popular practice. This allows for more information to be covered in multiple steps, rather than an overwhelming lesson in which multiple skills and concepts are taught in one-session (Wishkoski, Lundstrom & Davis, 2019). Even if one-shots are the preferred method by subject faculty or at an institution, one way to incorporate scaffolded learning is to work within the department to create content that builds upon previous skills throughout the discipline. A limitation to this method is if students have switched disciplines or if students who may have forgotten the content from previous courses.
Any type of library instruction that does not stand alone as its own course will require collaboration between librarians and subject faculty.
Strong collaboration takes time and is often a gradual, trust-building process. By its nature, collaboration can be frustrating, uncomfortable and time consuming. …Significant barriers to communication and collaboration exist. Most of these barriers are due to misperceptions – from both librarians and course instructors. Whereas the librarians might feel that course instructors are possessive of their time, curriculum, and students, course instructors may feel pressure by the amount of content they need to teach and loath to give up scarce instructional time” (Buchanan & McDonogh, 2021, pp. 6-7).
However, once a good collaboration is established, finding a fit between librarian participation in class and efficient use of time, students’ research skills can benefit. A true collaboration should start with conversations which offer time for the librarian and subject faculty to brainstorm the types of assignments and IL classes best for the students.
Case Study – Project Breakdown
The Librarian’s Perspective
After several semesters of providing the traditional one-shot method to the introductory psychology courses, the psychology librarian and two psychology professors began brainstorming ways to make the course scaffolded with IL concepts and research skills. The psychology professors both had experienced students struggling with topics such as authority, citations, and understanding different types of research. The collaboration took place over the summer of 2022, developing what the intervention would entail. During the fall semester 2022, there were four introductory psychology sections of approximately 40-55 students per section; two sections comprised the control group and two sections served as the experimental group, which exposed students to the hybrid embedded IL. On the first day of class, packets were distributed to all four sections that contained a survey of demographic information, an IL self-assessment, and a pre-test of IL instruction topics. The packets were distributed in print and completed in class to encourage student participation.
For the sections that served as the control group, the class was completed as usual and up to instructor discretion. While students in these sections could have sought librarian expertise on information literacy for relevant research papers/assignments, there was not a class-related activity integrating any librarian instruction within the class.
For the sections that served as the experimental group, the IL intervention included: a set of weekly online micro lesson videos and quizzes for 12 weeks, a 60-minute classroom activity addressing misinformation, and a scaffolded semester-long project on gathering, evaluating and disseminating psychological research.
The librarian posted one IL video per week for 12 weeks to the library’s YouTube page. The subject faculty added the videos and quizzes to the weekly workflow in the syllabus. Instructors also made these videos available on Blackboard, the learning management system (LMS). Additionally, due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, students were familiar with the asynchronous video model of the micro lessons. The videos had an average run time of approximately 7.5 minutes. The videos were intentionally short to combat bounce rate and retain the audience longer. After watching each video, students would take a participation quiz of two to three questions to determine if they retained information from the video. Students could take this quiz up to two times, and watch the video while completing the quiz to help motivate participation.
The intervention embedded a total of 12 videos throughout the semester, allowing for breaks and exams. The content of the videos is as follows:
- Part 1: Introduction to the Library, the Psychology Librarian and the Library Website
- Part 2: Peer Review Basics
- Part 3: Boolean Operators
- Part 4: Subject-specific versus Interdisciplinary Databases
- Part 5: Interlibrary Loan
- Part 6: Original Research, Review Articles and Meta Analyses
- Part 7: Open Access and Predatory Publishing
- Part 8: Popular Press, Trade Journals and Academic Journals
- Part 9: Authority and Credibility
- Part 10: Open Science Framework and Replicability Issues
- Part 11: Citing Secondary/Indirect Sources
- Part 12: APA Style Citations
During the third week of classes, the librarian joined the 2 experimental sections in-person to deliver a 45-minute presentation on evaluation of sources to assist with a Mythbuster activity. The presentation included topics such as: what makes a good source; why credibility is not only important, but contextual; looking for evidence and chasing it down; the differences between misinformation, disinformation and malinformation; and detecting confirmation bias. As the students were presented with this information, they were invited to weigh in on the topics and relate these topics to their own lives. In the Mythbuster activity, completed directly after the presentation, students were asked to look on a social media platform for a viral video dealing with facts about psychology. They were then asked to evaluate how credible (or not) the psychology fact turned out to be, and discuss the factors that impacted their evaluation. Students quickly found that the unfounded claims did not bother to share their evidence, sources, or address the authority or credibility of where the information originated. On the other hand, they recognized that the more evidence provided, even in the form of hyperlinks, the more they could find reputable information to back up the claims.
In the fourth week, students were assigned a short assignment to help with their final project, wherein they identified a topic related to the course and provided a single APA formatted reference of a peer-reviewed original research article with a copy of the abstract. Students were incentivized with an additional point of extra credit to visit the librarian to help them start their research. By the end of the sixth week, they needed to submit this short assignment. The micro-lessons on Original Research (video 6) and Interlibrary Loan (video 5) were strategically placed prior to this assignment to help students recognize what original research looks like, as well as the benefits of using interlibrary loan when they start getting into more nuanced research. Of the approximately 110 students enrolled in the embedded IL group, nearly 20% of the students took advantage of the incentivized visit. Upon completion of the incentivized visit period, the following was observed:
- Students were comfortable meeting with the librarian. Comments were made stating that students felt like they knew the librarian well from the videos.
- Students applied knowledge from previous videos to their research journey. In several meetings, students indicated they now knew how to place an interlibrary loan request and felt comfortable to do so.
- Some students who were advanced in their research skills simply came for the extra credit, however, the librarian opted to teach more advanced searching skills such as abstract searching, subject headings, and using the database thesaurus. Students indicated that they found the research consultation helpful and that despite having a comfortable grasp on research, they learned something new.
- Students that were in the beginner stage of research found benefit in brainstorming their search and often narrowed their search while talking to the librarian. They also reported a better understanding of original research versus review articles.
The final component of IL instruction was the scaffolded final project titled, Giving Psychology Away. For this assignment students needed to create an infographic on psychological research findings related to a topic presented in class. For this assignment, they needed to find 3 peer-reviewed, original research articles, present the main findings and citations in a clear, organized manner in their infographic, and provide a brief one page summary of the research topic that would accompany the infographic. Students were instructed to use in-text citations and create a reference page. Learning objectives of this assignment included: gaining experience researching a psychological topic, learning how to appropriately disseminate research findings within the IL framework, and improve skills in citations using APA, 7th ed.
A week before the final project was due, students watched their final micro lesson on APA style citations. This lesson was strategically saved for the end to keep the information fresh in their mind when they completed their Giving Psychology Away project and citing information.
At the end of the semester, the control courses, and the 2 embedded IL courses, were administered a second packet, with a self-assessment survey and post-test of IL knowledge and skills, identical to the survey and test given at the start of the semester. Students in the experimental sections had the opportunity to answer additional quantitative and qualitative questions about their thoughts and perceived usefulness of the embedded IL component. For further information on this curriculum, including links to the micro lessons, and copies of classroom materials, visit the open resources via the project link on Open Science Framework (OSF) (https://osf.io/k6nsm/).
The biggest obstacle from the librarian perspective was the content creation. This was admittedly time consuming. On average, the recorded videos required about an hour of preparation and editing per week. This challenge was heightened by staffing issues within the library and heavier than normal teaching load. While this may be common in many libraries, a benefit of recording these videos is that they can be used as reference materials for students outside of the general psychology course. These videos appear on the library’s YouTube page, therefore if other students are looking for information on a particular topic or if another instructor wishes to use the video in their classroom, they are freely available. Additionally, the same videos can be used in future semesters of the course.
The Subject Faculty’s Perspective
Integrating the IL components into our courses was relatively easy and straightforward. Both instructors had previously taught this course and had already created syllabi and classroom materials. The sections of this class shared learning objectives and course outcome goals, but there were differences regarding specific course content, pedagogical approaches, and assignments. Initially, there were some concerns regarding the amount of time and effort that would be required to integrate this new curriculum into these preexisting courses. However, these concerns were largely overestimated. IL curriculum is broad and can be easily integrated into most natural or social science introductory courses.
Like many introductory psychology courses, both sections included learning the basic tenets of science at the beginning of the course, which made it straightforward to align/add a few basic lectures that could serve as an introduction to the videos. In early collaboration meetings, we ensured that the same topics regarding science and research methodology were covered by both sections, but allowed freedom of how that could be accomplished. This permitted easy incorporation of specific topics into previously created course materials. These topics included: basic tenets of science, basic research designs, correlation or causation, and the replication crisis in science. Most of these topics are covered in the first few chapters of introductory textbooks and can be integrated into the class in the form of lectures, reading quizzes, classroom polls, etc. By aligning this early content, all students in the experimental sections started with a similar baseline understanding of the definition of science and how research is conducted in psychology, which would help them understand the concepts presented in the micro-lesson videos. After these foundational concepts were presented during class, the videos for the rest of the semester did not have to be aligned with specific course content. Instructors could integrate these concepts into various course topics easily if they chose, and throughout the semester both instructors would informally refer to the videos during specific class topics. For example, in one section of the class, students were learning about personality change and stability throughout the lifespan. While looking at different published articles on that topic, the instructor referred to the prior week’s IL video that explained the difference between meta-analyses and review articles, and had students identify the pros and cons of the meta-analytical study findings relative to the review article findings presented in class. Any instructor could do a similar review on a variety of topics within psychological articles (or articles from other scientific disciplines).
The aspect of the intervention that took the most time for the subject faculty was creating and integrating the Mythbusters activity and capstone project, which took about 4-5, hourlong meetings for planning and implementation. During these meetings, which were conducted the summer prior and into the semester, we identified measurement of learning outcomes, created assignment instructions, and detailed a grading rubric. Although this initial work took some time and coordination, future instructors can utilize these premade materials and easily integrate them into any existing course structure, as long as it is paired with the IL videos. Outside of the collaborative meetings, the only weekly work for the instructors was to create the quizzes on the IL videos, and manage the videos and quizzes on the LMS for each particular section. This process took less than an hour each week. Additionally, future instructors can spend even less time on this work, since the quizzes are openly available on OSF. Many LMS allow instructors to create quizzes and schedules for their release ahead of time, which would cut down on the amount of work to be completed throughout the semester. This process was also simple enough that it could be completed by an undergraduate or graduate teaching assistant.
Overall, creating and integrating this IL intervention into these courses was less time-intensive than initially predicted and the collaboration process was highly useful. The subject faculty was able to learn about IL initiatives through the ACRL framework, which brought a broader perspective to course outcomes. Rather than thinking about IL learning outcomes based on a skills-perspective, i.e., learning how to use PsycInfo, we could integrate IL into other conceptual learning outcomes, i.e., science consumerism. Through this collaboration, we aligned specific learning outcomes to help psychology students be successful in future laboratory courses. We also broadened the scope to help non-majors be successful in other science or research-based courses.
We sampled 217 students across four sections of General Psychology, the introductory course for the major that many undergraduate students enroll in to receive natural science, general education credit. There were 101 students, 46% of the sample, in the experimental group, or sections of the course that received the IL interventions throughout the semester. See Table 1 for more information comparing student demographics between the experimental and control groups. It is important to note that of the 211 students that answered the question in the sample, only 68 could confirm receiving prior library instruction.
|unwilling to report
|PRIOR LIBRARY INSTRUCTION
Students who completed the IL interventions were prompted to provide quantitative and qualitative feedback on their experience in the course. A total of 76 of the 101 students in the experimental courses provided feedback. For the quantitative feedback, students answered the following three questions on a 5-point Likert scale:
- “How easy was it to access the IL videos on [the university’s learning management system]?”(1 being not easy and 5 being very easy), see graph 1
- “How enjoyable were the IL videos?” (1-not enjoyable and 5-very enjoyable), see graph 2
- “Was the information in the IL videos useful for this class?” (1-not useful and 5-very useful), see graph 3
Overall, students found the videos easy to access on Blackboard, enjoyable, and useful for the class. Table 2 includes some of the qualitative feedback on their experience with the IL intervention in this course, which was representative of the overall feedback students reported.
|Table 2: Student Responses to Qualitative Question
|Q1. “Would you recommend keeping the IL videos and/or quizzes for future classes in General Psychology? Why or why not?”
|I think so because it definitely helped me increase my IL knowledge and was overall beneficial to my learning
|Yes, it is a good piece of information that is useful for psychological class research projects.
|Yes because it helps students use an integral resource
|Yes, because they are informative, yet relatively low-effort
|I would recommend them but have a little more depth to the quizzes overall to keep information regarding IL a frequent topic
|Yes just so people are familiar with the terms and comfortable to meet Allison
|Yes, especially since a lot of freshmen take this class, it would be helpful for them.
|Yes, IL quizzes are easy points and can be useful for future classes. This information is not commonly taught in many courses, yet it is still beneficial to talk about.
|Yes; not very time consuming but full of useful information
|Yes, because there was helpful info that I wouldn't know without the IL videos
|Yes because they showed me how to find good peer reviewed articles for papers
|I think that the videos were helpful but I often found myself having to rewatch sometimes. I feel like learning about it in person would be more engaging but overall they were useful.
|I would, it wasn't helpful for me since I have already went through most of it in other classes, but I could see how it could be helpful.
|I would, they're great supplements for the projects or homework that requires these concepts & we get points for it.
Students were asked to provide a self-report assessment of their IL skills by answering 10 questions on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 -strongly disagree to 5-strongly agree. Of the questions, 3 were reverse-scored; then all 10 questions were summed, providing students with a total score between 5 (low information literacy self-assessment) and 50 (high information literacy self-assessment). Students in both experimental and control courses completed this assessment at the beginning and again at the end of the semester, which allowed for between- and within-group comparisons.
Independent sample t-tests were completed to analyze between-group comparisons of IL skills and knowledge between the experimental and control groups. At the beginning of the semester, students in the control courses (M = 33.65, SD = 5.15) compared to the students in the experimental courses (M = 31.99, SD = 4.73) reported significantly higher self-assessment of IL skills and knowledge, t(202) = 2.37, p < .05, d = .33. A possible explanation is that there was a small, yet significant difference of age between the experimental and control group. The experimental group (M = 18.69, SD = 1.09) was younger than the control group (M = 19.01, SD = 1.18), t(209) = 1.99, p < .05, d = 0.27. However, by the end of the course, students in the experimental courses (M = 37.21, SD = 4.15) compared to the control group (M = 34.33, SD = 5.16) reported significantly higher self-assessment, t(175) = 3.97, p < . 0001. This was a moderate-large effect (d = .61).
A dependent-samples t-test was utilized to measure the change in self-reported IL skills and knowledge for students in the experimental courses between the beginning and end of the semester. The difference between the posttest and pretest (MD = 5.52, SDD = 5.21) indicate that the IL intervention did significantly improve student’s self-assessment of their own IL skills and knowledge, which was a large effect, t(62) = 8.41, p < .0001, d = 1.06. After the IL instruction, students indicated having more IL skills and knowledge.
The goals of the current study was to increase student’s IL by incorporating short weekly videos, while embedding the IL intervention into the course without significantly altering the course. Based on the self-report questionnaire, students who were exposed to the videos and IL activities expressed higher levels of confidence in their IL knowledge and abilities. With the ease of implementation of these videos and activities and the significant gains reported by students, this curriculum appears to be effective and efficient.
While the IL intervention was overall worthwhile, there are still limitations to these conclusions and the project. Our conclusions are limited to subjective outcomes at this point. Students may be over- or under-estimating their knowledge and skills in IL due to a cognitive bias like the Dunning-Kruger effect. Beyond the limitations of the analyses, there were some additional limitations of the curriculum design. Despite the best efforts of the librarian, student feedback indicated that the videos were often too long to be fully engaging. This may have partially impacted consistency in watching or finishing the videos. Although we attempted to improve compliance by including short quizzes in the overall grades, students may have simply guessed on the quizzes since they had a retake available. Another limitation of the study design was implementing the intervention in 2 separate sections conducted by different instructors. While efforts were made to synchronize the amount of time videos, quizzes and activities were made available and presented, there may have been differences between the sections regarding references made to the videos, reminders to complete the quizzes, etc. that may have impacted outcomes. Despite these limitations, many lessons learned guidelines can be surmised.
In order to create an efficient curriculum, collaboration is an integral component to a successful project. We took our time developing what we determined to be the most important IL skills and concepts and the order and method of which they should be introduced to the students. For example, the subject faculty noted that students needed to be introduced to the skill of citing indirect sources. This permitted the opportunity to not only teach the skill behind citations, but also include the Framework concept that information has value and researchers should give creators of information the proper attribution. Having the subject faculty adding point value to completion of weekly quizzes emphasized the importance of the content, as well as having an effect, albeit minor, on the students’ grade.
Collaboration was not only important for content, but also for the amount of time and resources that the subject faculty were able to dedicate to the IL intervention. This was a hybrid of videos and an in-person class instruction as well as voluntary opportunities to meet with the librarian for one-on-one assistance.
We would recommend that at least one of the sessions remain in-person, and to strategically place the in-person IL session within the course schedule. Students reported feeling more comfortable and at ease meeting individually with the librarian after previously meeting her in the class and seeing the created videos. Having the librarian attend a class after creating videos may have given more perceived authority than a guest lecturer they may not have previously seen. Additionally, incentivizing a one-on-one visit was worthwhile, as it did get students to go to the library to earn the extra credit, and again, promoted a stronger presence of the librarian.
For ease of access, we recommend that any video content be housed on an open platform that students can access with limited barriers. Keeping content solely accessible through course management systems not only adds an unnecessary barrier, but also may be removed from the students’ access in subsequent semesters. Additionally, this may also be to the benefit of other instructors or students who could refer the content to other users.
Lastly, incorporating some kind of final or capstone project for the course is recommended. We found that this project motivated students to watch the videos as they pertained to an assignment they would be completing for a grade. They could apply what they learned, and review the materials in order to successfully complete the final project.
Future considerations for this project include expanding this model to additional psychology courses, such as statistical methods and general psychology labs. In the feedback from students, there were several comments that indicated these videos would be helpful in the psychology lab classes. Since it is not required for students to take the general psychology lab and lecture simultaneously, embedding the IL lessons in the lab could prove useful.
Additionally, it may be worth advocating for this mixed method of IL instruction to be embedded in courses outside of psychology. If the online video component remained general on IL instead of subject specific information, other courses could easily adopt this model, and then schedule an appropriate time for a librarian to visit their class in-person.
It would also be worthwhile to investigate the objective outcomes of the IL sessions for the students. While students in the experimental courses reported a higher self-assessment of understanding IL and practical skills upon completion of the intervention, it remains to be seen if objectively, the embedded curriculum resulted in higher quality of final projects or general knowledge of IL.
Despite the most common form of IL instruction being the one-shot method, it is reasonable to surmise that repeated exposure to librarians and IL instruction allows for better retention of concepts and skills and a higher confidence of IL. Due to the constraints of time and exposure in the traditional classroom, identifying additional ways to embed IL is well worth the effort. The embedded hybrid method also allows for strengthening collaboration efforts between librarians and subject faculty, and can promote future collaborative projects.
The micro-lessons embedded within the general psychology curriculum via online videos offered a solution to the tight time-frame for course content, and having the IL content worth a portion of the grade gave weight to the importance and necessity of the lessons. The collaboration and amount of effort going into the semester may have been initially heavy, but once created and delivered, it made for a simple implementation. Additionally this model will work for future semesters with minimal revising necessary.
Students acknowledged the value of having the information embedded into the curriculum, many citing that the IL content helped, and will help in additional courses. The harmonious objectives of ACRL’s Framework and APA’s guidelines for IL made the general psychology course an excellent choice as a pilot, and a model that can be applied to additional disciplines.
American Psychological Association. (2013, August). Learning goals & outcomes: APA guidelines for undergraduate psychology major version 2.0. https://www.apa.org/ed/precollege/about/learning-goals.pdf
American Psychological Association. (2021, October). APA introductory psychology initiative (IPI) student learning outcomes for introductory psychology. https://www.apa.org/about/policy/introductory-psychology-initiative-student-outcomes.pdf
Association of College and Research Libraries. (2016, January 11). Framework for information literacy for higher education. https://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/issues/infolit/framework1.pdf
Booke, P., & Wiebe, T. J. (2017). Improving student assessments of elections: the use of information literacy and a course-embedded librarian. Learning and Teaching, 10(2), 83-106.
Buchanan, H. E., & McDonough, B. A. (2021). The one-shot library instruction survival guide (3rd ed.). ALA Editions.
Gross, M., Julien, H., & Latham, D. (2022). Librarian views of the ACRL Framework and the impact of covid-19 on information literacy instruction in community colleges. Library & Information Science Research, 44(2), 101151.
Mery, Y., Newby, J., & Peng, K. (2012). Why one-shot information literacy sessions are not the future of instruction: A case for online credit courses. College & Research Libraries, 73(4), 366-377.
Miyaoka, M., Toolsidass, R., & Magee, M. (2023). Embedded Librarians and Scaffolding for Remote Learning. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 23(1), 169-195.
Morin, L. (2021). The First-Year Library Instruction One-Shot: A Place for Caring. Communications in Information Literacy, 15(1), 95-103.
Oehrli, J. A. (2022). Practical academic library instruction: Learner-centered techniques. ALA Editions.
Squibb, S. D., & Mikkelsen, S. (2016). Assessing the value of course-embedded information literacy on student learning and achievement. College & research libraries, 77(2), 164-183.
Tomaszewski, R. (2021). A STEM e-class in action: A case study for asynchronous one-shot library instruction. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 47(5), 102414.
van Beem, R., & Becker, P. (2015). Embedded librarianship and blended learning: an enhancing combination to increase effectiveness of information literacy training. In IASL Annual Conference Proceedings (pp. 425-435).
Wishkoski, R., Lundstrom, K., & Davis, E. (2019). Faculty teaching and librarian-facilitated assignment design. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 19(1), 95-126.