Assessing Auburn University Library's Tiger Information Literacy Tutorial (TILT)

Abstract

PurposeDuring Spring semester 2001, Auburn University Libraries launched the Tiger Information Literacy Tutorial (TILT), based on the Texas Information Literacy Tutorial, designed by librarians at the University of Texas at Austin. This work assesses the effectiveness of the tutorial.Design/methodology/approachIn‐depth analysis of data collected over three semesters is presented.FindingsFollowing the Texas model, Auburn's TILT is comprised of three modules, covering searching, selecting, and evaluating information resources. Overall student perceptions of the tutorial, including technology difficulties, is reviewed; and students' personal views of their own research skills are discussed. The online information tutorial was viewed as effective, with the data indicating a need for additional study and improvement.ValueAs advances are made in computer‐aided and hypermedia‐aided instruction, the tutorial will continue to evolve as a learning tool.

Information literacy assessment

“…A selection of questions used in the briefer tests can be found in Houlson, 2007;Knight, 2002;and Helmke and Matthies, 2004. Examples of questions from longer tests include Burkhardt, 2007;Noe and Bishop, 2005;and Ondrusek, 2005. In summary, there is a real mix in the way librarians are using multiple choice questions to assess information literacy. Even though it is a method often chosen for convenience, some groups have put a great deal of effort into producing tools which map question areas onto established information literacy competencies and for which they have tried to establish reliability and validity.…”

Assessing information literacy among German psychology students

“…The measurement of information literacy appears to be more advanced in English-speaking countries, as several tests have already been developed (e.g., Wise et al, 2009;Noe and Bishop, 2005;Ondrusek et al, 2005), most of them to evaluate information literacy courses. Many tests use a multiple-choice format for practical reasons (e.g., ease of use, reliability).…”

Developing online instruction according to best practices

“…A general set of best practices has emerged from the literature on both learning object development and learning object assessment, concentrated in four key areas: content, structure, implementation, and assessment. In the area of content, in general, multiple authors stress the importance of either avoiding or defining any library jargon used in learning objects (Reece 2005;Noe & Bishop 2005). Blummer and Kritskaya (2009) suggest aligning content to an existing set of standards, such as the ACRL (Association of College and Research Libraries) Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education.…”

“…When implementing learning objects, multiple authors suggest that course-related use will be more effective than stand-alone (Dewald 1999a;Veldof & Beavers 2001;Noe & Bishop 2005). Several also recommend collaborating with faculty and other campus stakeholders (Blummer & Kritskaya 2009;Lo & Dale 2009).…”