Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

One Size Doesn’t Fit All – Effectiveness and Subjective Evaluations of Adaptable Information Literacy Instruction

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Information Literacy: Moving Toward Sustainability (ECIL 2015)

Part of the book series: Communications in Computer and Information Science ((CCIS,volume 552))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 1717 Accesses

Abstract

The paper examines whether effects of an adaptable information literacy instruction program are associated with (a) adherence to the recommendations of online learning contents derived from a test of prior knowledge and (b) subjective evaluations of the program. An adaptable blended learning training for German psychology students was evaluated in a study with a pretest-posttest design. N = 64 advanced students completed two tests of scholarly information literacy, an information literacy self-efficacy scale, and an evaluation questionnaire. Participants who worked on more online materials than recommended based on their pretest performance did not differ in their gain scores from participants who exactly followed the recommendations. However, both groups outperformed participants who omitted recommended materials. According to subjective evaluations, the latter participants constitute a “risk group” with low subjective acceptance of online teaching which might need additional support during online learning or alternative forms of instruction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Research was funded by a grant from the Joint Initiative for Research and Innovation acquired within the Leibniz Competition 2012 (SAW-2012-ZPID-6 114).

  2. 2.

    Online materials and a training manual are available online (currently in German language only): http://www.zpid.de/blink.

  3. 3.

    Five participants could not be assigned to one of the groups because they did not comply with recommendations in a systematic fashion, i.e. they omitted recommended but worked on optional chapters.

References

  1. Spitzer, K.L., Eisenberg, M.B., Lowe, C.A.: Information Literacy: Essential Skills for the Information Age. Information Resources Publications, Syracuse University, Syracuse (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Grassian, E.S., Kaplowitz, J.R.: Information Literacy Instruction Theory and Practice, 2nd edn. Neal-Schuman, New York (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Mery, Y., Newby, J., Peng, K.: Why one-shot information literacy sessions are not the future of instruction a case for online credit courses. Coll. Res. Libr. 73, 366–377 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Snow, R.: Aptitude, learner control, and adaptive instruction. Educ. Psychol. 15, 151–158 (1980)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Jonassen, D.H., Grabowski, B.L.: Handbook of Individual Differences, Learning, and Instruction. Erlbaum, Hillsdale (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cronbach, L.J., Snow, R.E.: Aptitudes and Instructional Methods - A Handbook for Research on Interactions. Halsted Press, New York (1977)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Heacox, D.: Differentiating Instruction in the Regular Classroom. Free Spirit Publishing, Minneapolis (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Leutner, D.: Instructional design principles for adaptivity in open learning environments. In: Seel, N.M., Dijkstra, S. (eds.) Curriculum, Plans, and Processes in Instructional Design, pp. 289–307. Erlbaum, Mahwah (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Fischer, G.: Supporting learning on demand with design environments. In: Birnbaum, L. (ed.) Proceedings of the First International Conference on the Learning Sciences, pp. 165–172. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education, Evanston (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Brophy, J.E.: Motivating Students to Learn, 3rd edn. Routledge, New York (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Karich, A.C., Burns, M.K., Maki, K.E.: Updated meta-analysis of learner control within educational technology. Rev. Educ. Res. 84, 392–410 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kruger, J., Dunning, D.: Unskilled and unaware of it: how difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 77, 1121–1134 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Shin, E.C., Schallert, D.L., Savenye, W.C.: Effects of learner control, advisement, and prior knowledge on young students’ learning in a hypertext environment. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 42, 33–46 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Andretta, S.: Information Literacy: a Practitioner’s Guide. Chandos, Oxford (2005)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  15. Gross, M., Latham, D.: Undergraduate perceptions of information literacy: defining, attaining, and self-assessing skills. Coll. Res. Libr. 70, 336–350 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Park, O., Lee, J.: Adaptive instructional systems. In: Spector, J.M., Merrill, M.D., Elen, J., Bishop, M.J. (eds.) Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology, vol. 25, 3rd edn, pp. 469–484. Routledge, London (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kirschner, P.A., van Merriënboer, J.J.: Do learners really know best? Urban legends in education. Educ. Psychol. 48, 169–183 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Owston, R., York, D., Murtha, S.: Student perceptions and achievement in a university blended learning strategic initiative. Internet High. Educ. 18, 38–46 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL): Psychology information literacy standards (2010). http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/psych_info_lit

  20. Leichner, N., Peter, J., Mayer, A.-K., Krampen, G.: Assessing information literacy among German psychology students. Ref. Serv. Rev. 41, 660–674 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Rosman, T., Mayer, A.-K., Krampen, G.: Measuring psychology students’ information-seeking skills in a situational judgment test format: construction and validation of the PIKE-P test. Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. (2015). doi:10.1027/1015-5759/a000239

  22. Leichner, N.: Multimethodale Erfassung von Informationskompetenz bei Psychologiestudierenden [Multimethodal Assessment of Information Literacy in Psychology Students]. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Trier, Trier (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Peter, J., Leichner, N., Mayer, A.-K., Krampen, G.: Das Inventar zur Evaluation von Blended Learning (IEBL). Konstruktion und Erprobung in einem Training professioneller Informationskompetenz [Inventory for the Evaluation of Blended Learning. Construction and Testing Within a Training of Scholarly Information Literacy]. In: Krämer, M., Weger, U., Zupanic, M. (eds.) Psychologiedidaktik und Evaluation X [Didactics of Psychology and Evaluation X], pp. 275–282. Shaker, Aachen (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Cronbach, L.J., Furby, L.: How we should measure “change”: or should we? Psychol. Bull. 74, 68–80 (1970)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Price, R., Becker, K., Clark, L., Collins, S.: Embedding information literacy in a first-year business undergraduate course. Stud. High. Educ. 36, 705–718 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Webber, S., Boon, S., Johnston, B.: A comparison of UK academics’ conceptions of information literacy in two disciplines: English and marketing. Libr. Inf. Res. 29, 4–15 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Rosman, T., Birke, P.: Fachspezifische Erfassung von Recherchekompetenz durch prozedurale Wissenstests: Psychologie vs. Informatik [Domain-Specific Assessment of Information Searching Skills by Procedural Knowledge Tests: Psychology vs. Computer Sciences]. In: Mayer, A.-K. (ed.) Informationskompetenz im Hochschulkontext – Interdisziplinäre Forschungsperspektiven [Information Literacy in the University Context – Interdisciplinary Research Perspectives], pp. 103–120. Pabst, Lengerich (2015)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ZPID - Leibniz Institute for Psychology Information, Universitätsring 15, 54296, Trier, Germany

    Anne-Kathrin Mayer, Johannes Peter, Nikolas Leichner & Günter Krampen

  2. University of Trier, Universitätsring 15, 54286, Trier, Germany

    Günter Krampen

Authors
  1. Anne-Kathrin Mayer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Johannes Peter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nikolas Leichner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Günter Krampen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anne-Kathrin Mayer .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. of Information Management, Hacettepe University, Beytepe, Ankara, Türkiye

    Serap Kurbanoglu

  2. DICEN IDF EA 7369, Université Paris Descartes DICEN IDF EA 7369, Paris, France

    Joumana Boustany

  3. University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia

    Sonja Špiranec

  4. University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Esther Grassian

  5. University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Diane Mizrachi

  6. School of Information, The University of Texas School of Information, Austin, TX, USA

    Loriene Roy

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Mayer, AK., Peter, J., Leichner, N., Krampen, G. (2015). One Size Doesn’t Fit All – Effectiveness and Subjective Evaluations of Adaptable Information Literacy Instruction. In: Kurbanoglu, S., Boustany, J., Špiranec, S., Grassian, E., Mizrachi, D., Roy, L. (eds) Information Literacy: Moving Toward Sustainability. ECIL 2015. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 552. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28197-1_29

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28197-1_29

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-28196-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-28197-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation