Library workshop evaluation

From HLWIKI Canada

Jump to: navigation, search
An intra-institutional assessment process...
Are you interested in contributing to HLWIKI Canada - hlwiki.ca? contact: dean.giustini@ubc.ca

To browse other articles on a range of HSL topics, see the wiki index.

Contents

Introduction

See also Assessment for academic librarians, Presentation skills and Teaching health library users

Many health librarians evaluate their workshops informally, however more sophisticated formal methods are increasingly used. Information literacy efforts and other training sessions can be improved simply by using reflective practices, reading about best practices and focussing on peer review of our teaching efforts. The problem is knowing where to begin and what tools to use. The aim is to help in evaluating training sessions by pointing to current best evidence, practice and tools. Before examining the evidence or tools available, it may be worth considering the reasons for evaluating your training and by acquainting yourself with current practices in library assessment.

Why evaluate (or assess) your library workshops?

  • To determine whether techniques/methods make a difference
  • To assess library performance
  • To assess whether teaching is a good use of resources
  • To demonstrate a need for funding or redistributed funding
  • To improve services and make them more responsive
  • To redesign materials and methods
  • To practice evidence-based librarianship

There is insufficient evidence about workshop evaluation. Many health librarians indicate the need to evaluate their teaching, but are unaware of how to get the information from their users or the evaluation process.

Methods of assessment

A common method of evaluation is administering a simple questionnaire after training sessions. Questionnaires help to assess participant satisfaction with aspects of the session, including how effective the librarian was at teaching. Academic librarians should use pre- and post-test measures for the ongoing quality improvement of their teaching. Questionnaires also provide some indication of how much our users learn and retain after our sessions. In the literature, studies suggest that participants view their abilities after library workshops rather differently from their actual skill levels. By measuring skills post-hoc, one survey used a search assignment to test comprehension of what academic librarians taught during sessions. This approach is suitable for academic institutions where librarians liaise with faculty teaching courses.

Implications for trainers

The evidence from surveys highlights issues for trainers who want to undertake evaluation processes : 1) few practical tools exist that are specifically aimed at evaluating health information skills 2) a wealth of information on assessing training can be adapted but this can take considerable preparation. Several research questions arise regarding evaluation, such as testing and adapting tools used in other areas of librarianship; developing measures/tools, and drawing on what has already been undertaken on standards and competencies; much of the research undertaken to date has focussed on academic health libraries, though a growing corpus of information outside of academia seems to suggest a move out into the special library environment of hospital and clinical libraries.

Summary of evidence base

There is a wealth of literature and web related resources on information skills training (or information literacy as it is often known). See the many studies in LISA, ERIC, PubMed - MEDLINE and on Google scholar. Much of the evidence originates in the US or Australia rather than the UK and describes various approaches to teaching or courses at specific institutions. There is considerably less material on evaluating training and even less that is specifically health focussed. Much of the evidence may need to be adapted to your own particular needs, and library.

Recent academic reports & studies

  • A 2010 JISC report summarized 12 user behavior studies sponsored by RIN, JISC, and OCLC in the UK and the US between 2005-2010
  • In 2007, ACRL published a report on the University of Rochester’s "Studying Students" project (see: http://bit.ly/gCUBxx). This project employed a team of librarians and anthropologists in an attempt to discern how undergraduate students gathered information while preparing research papers. Here’s one of the more interesting findings of this project:
  • "...library staff undertook a reference desk survey to understand changing patterns at the reference desk and followed that up with a set of brief interviews in the student union...The survey and interviews revealed that few students understand what reference librarians do and how reference librarians can help them, nor do they consider asking for the help reference librarians are trained to provide. Rather, students tend to feel that they are good at finding their own resources and answering their own questions. If they need expert advice, they turn either to their instructors or, surprisingly, to their families, whom they contact by phone or e-mail."
  • A group of Illinois academic libraries, inspired by the Rochester project, did a study of undergraduate information-seeking behaviours (see: http://bit.ly/a8HZVZ). It employed a team of librarians and anthropologists. Their May 2010 report found that:
  • "While the majority of students we interviewed struggled with one or more aspects of academic research, very few students sought help from a librarian. In fact, one of the most striking aspects of the ERIAL study was the near-invisibility of librarians within the academic worldview of students."

Websites

References
Retrieved from "http://hlwiki.slais.ubc.ca/index.php/Library_workshop_evaluation"
Personal tools