A private university, caters for mostly undergraduates. Use EDS, but call it RUL Discovery. Still believes we have a need for information literacy.
All students worry about is how to get what the lecturers are demanding from them. The basic skills they need for their studies are not changing, but info seeking behaviour and expectations are changing. Discovery services are not delivering a Google like service. Google encourages definitions, not discovery. They are not encourages to follow the research trail. Before a student can even use a discovery services, they need to learn about ‘what makes a journal academic’, ‘what is the difference between different sources?’ Easy entry point for lecturers to understand what they are getting – how to get to online resources and how use RUL discovery.
Now can target to teaching e.g. Journals to support theory element of a case study. Their search box is onBlackboard. Use cards from Middlesex University to create games. Also show images, ask what it is, what is going on, what they are making etc. this teaches key terms.
Intro to- search terms, keywords, subject terms. Had contact time with every student.
Conclusion – they increase the divide between where students sit and where the information they need is. Their expectations are different what they need to learn. Generation Google vs keywords, databases, journals peer review.
Nanchang joint programme, based in China and England. 74 students came to London for the summer. Had polls and Handed out evaluation forms. Found that very few used the Nachang Library or QMU resources. Majority used Baidu (in Chinese, has 10% of market) or Google. Baidu goes not have a ‘Scholar’ bit. On Summon, change the search strategy from ‘how to I find it?’ To ‘how do I refine it?’.
Summon @ LSBU (London South bank university)
Particularly mentioned non-journal stuff e.g. Financial databases, tv programmes etc andLaw subject area are still both problematic.
Drops in for medical students – QMUL
Academics often want an IL session I their first week – poor timing for projects, dissertations as long since been forgotten. Unable to meet needs of all participants, especially in large groups. Introduced drop ins to supplement formal teaching. Targeted learning at the time of need. 2 hours on Wednesday pm. Every week of the year.
They ask about searching skills, referencing. Interestingly, ran questionnaires a long time after the event. Students were using skills learnt in the sessions for particular projects. Common themes were increase in confidence.
Benefits were : point of need teaching, tailored to individuals, can also address multiple needs and can be 121 teaching. If there are very large groups (24showed up for 1) they have group work to start, then q and a and 121s. It is hands on, regular and friendly.
Challenges are timing – what about the sports, some have teaching Wednesday pm, maintaining staffing levels, uncertainty and victims of own success?
No single way to teach IL, experiment with different pedagogical approaches.
Our work here is done..or is it? Vanessa Hill, Middlesex University
Librarians were guardians of info, controlling access and organising material. Tennent “nobody but librarians want to search, everyone else wants to find” from Coonan article, 2012.
Myths IT = info literate. Talk about evaluation, using devices, searching for material. Some students search on Google, then check using Summon to see if material is ‘good’. Academic staff at university thought that info skills had been taught at school. Sheila Webber’s research suggests students not being prepared, they are spoon fed for exams and to meet government targets. They often lack e-resources so school children think the library only has books.
Assumption that info skills will be picked up by osmosis or by trial and error. Lectures are often seen to be about process – how to use a database etc. but we do not do that anymore.
Worth interviewing academic staff? See info skills, all suffered from info overload. They all thought that had good
info skills, but questioned their colleagues skills. They perceived problems with graduates of the future – want to create open minded and critical students, but did not see librarians as being able to help. The perception was old fashioned role. They talked about academic literacy- using information to create knowledge. We are part of knowledge creation in an academic environment.
Solutions- games in workshops. Hands on searching, evaluation e.g. Rating 3 different reference lists. Currency
Summon makes searching easier. We do need to teach information literacy.
(n.b. I used these Open Access cards available from JORUM at my session for surface pattern students on 13th November and they were popular, engaging and useful – ej)
Lego serious play at UCS – Bucky Blunk, Cambridge University.
Each person asked to select 15 pieces of Lego. LSP = Lego Serious Play
Sarah Molloy- future work to enable open content to be found on Summon.
Publications, research data, software, government data, theses open content. A range we already provide access to. Institutional repositories e.g. by searching CORE.
Fig share, pubmedcentral. Data.gov (open government data) OERd = MIT open courseware, JORUM. At QMUL, Summon lists thesis collection (print) and e-collection, all their research papers and a handful of datasets.
Currently congifured with PloS, OLH, OpenSIGLE. But content could contain many versions – what are we actually getting in terms of results.
Summon User Group – they are hoping to buy Ex libris and can bring some managers over from the USA. It will be in January 2016.