Assessing learning outcomes in two information retrieval learning environments

Methods for Evaluating Interactive Information Retrieval Systems with Users

“…These end products, in turn, are studied along with the subject's interactions with the system. Example studies that have used such methods include Egan et al [83], Halttunen and Järvelin [116], Kelly et al [166], Marchionini and Crane [192] and Vakkari [280].…”

Teaching and learning in information retrieval

“…With respect to search strategies, the main goal of instruction is to develop the learners' practical capability to search and understand the heuristic nature of IR techniques (Airo et al, 2007;Halttunen, 2007;Halttunen and Järvelin, 2005). Another educational goal is to improve the search skills of the students (Halttunen, 2003;Brajnik et al, 2003;Fourie & van Brakel, 1995).…”

“…Examples of studies centred on the evaluation of learning outcomes using a tool as the basis for instruction can be found in Halttunen & Järvelin (2005) and Halttunen (2003;. This research is focused on the comparison of traditional and experimental IR learning environments in the context of an introductory subject to IR.…”

Learning and Training to Search

“…As mentioned above, the amount of existing research is relatively modest, and it appears to be based on discrete projects instead of systematic research programs. There is one notable exception: Halttunen (2004) and the studies that are included in this dissertation (Halttunen, 2003a, b;Halttunen and Järvelin, 2004;Halttunen and Sormunen, 2000). We will first describe the relevant studies and then review the conclusions we can draw based on this research.…”

“…Several noteworthy findings emerge from this study: 1) the importance of using relevant, meaningful learning tasks that provide a context for the learning process; 2) the negative effect of decontextualized tasks on motivation; 3) the importance of closely linking theory and practice; and 4) the importance of feedback. Halttunen and Järvelin (2004) report the results of the learning outcome comparison between a traditional group and an experimental group that had the benefit of systematically implemented scaffolding and anchoring. The experimental group performed fewer semantic knowledge errors (errors in transforming an information request into a query) and were able to achieve better search results.…”