Information Literacy Strategies Used by Second- and Third-Year Biology Students
Results from focus groups with 23 second- and third-year biology students revealed gradual gains in information literacy (IL) abilities and dispositions needed for them to join the community of scientific practice as laid out in the ACRL Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education. Students were consumers of information and not yet producers of information. They interacted often with primary research articles but struggled to use research tools effectively; remembered active learning vividly; and relied on video resources, Google, and discussions with peers and instructors to define terms and understand results. Findings support the value of collaboration between librarians and science faculty to incorporate IL skills in the process of scientific discovery.
Association of College & Research Libraries. 2015. Framework for information literacy for higher education. Chicago: American Library Association. [Cited 2018 Sep 6]. Available from http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework .
Association of College & Research Libraries. 2006. Information literacy standards for science and engineering/technology. Chicago: American Library Association. [Cited 2018 Sep 6]. Available from http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/infolitscitech .
Blank, J.M., McGaughey, K.J., Keeling, E.L., Thorp, K.L., Shannon, C.C. & Scaramozzino J.M. 2016. A novel assessment tool for quantitative evaluation of science literature search performance: application to first-year and senior undergraduate biology majors. College & Research Libraries 77(6):682–702. DOI: 10.5860/crl.77.6.682 .
Callinan, J.E. 2005. Information-seeking behaviour of undergraduate biology students: a comparative analysis of first year and final year students in University College Dublin. Library Review 54(2):86–99. DOI: 10.1108/00242530510583039 .
Dinkelman, A.L. 2010. Using course syllabi to assess research expectations of biology majors: implications for further development of information literacy skills in the curriculum. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship 60. DOI: : 10.5062/F49Z92TJ .
Elrod, S.L. & Somerville M.M. 2007. Literature-based scientific learning: a collaboration model. Journal of Academic Librarianship 33(6):684–691. DOI: 10.1016/j.acalib.2007.09.007.
Ferguson, J.E., Neely, T.Y. & Sullivan, K. 2006. A baseline information literacy assessment of biology students. Reference and User Services Quarterly 46(2):61–71. DOI: 10.5860/rusq.46n2.61.
Fuselier, L. & Nelson, B. 2011. A test of the efficacy of an information literacy lesson in an introductory biology laboratory course with a strong science-writing component. Science and Technology Libraries 30(1):58–75. DOI: 10.1080/0194262X.2011.547101.
Gregory, K. 2013. Laboratory logistics: strategies for integrating information literacy instruction into science laboratory classes. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship 74. DOI: 10.5062/F49G5JSJ.
Groenewald, T. 2008. Memos and memoing. In: Given, L., editor. The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods. Thousand Oaks (CA): SAGE. p. 506. [Cited 2018 Sep 6]. Available from http://sk.sagepub.com/reference/research/n260.xml .
Hartman, P., Newhouse, R. & Perry, V. 2015. Building a sustainable life science information literacy program using the train-the-trainer model. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship 77. DOI: 10.5062/F4G15XTM.
Jacklin, M.L. & Robinson, K. 2013. Evolution of various library instruction strategies: using student feedback to create and enhance online active learning assignments. Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research [Internet]. [Cited 2018 Sep 6]. 8(1):1–21. DOI: 10.21083/partnership.v8i1.2499.
Lantz, C. 2016. Information literacy in the lab: graduate teaching experiences in first-year biology. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship 85. DOI: 10.5062/F4VD6WFV.
Miller, L.N. 2011. University biology patrons in the library literature 2000-2010: a content analysis & literature review. Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research [Internet]. [Cited 2018 Sep 6]. 6(1). DOI: 10.21083/partnership.v6i1.1400.
Molteni, V.E. & Chan, E.K. (2015). Student confidence/overconfidence in the research process. Journal of Academic Librarianship 41(1):2–8. DOI: 10.1016/j.acalib.2014.11.012.
Morgan, D. & Krueger, R. 1993. When to use focus groups and why. In Morgan, D. L. SAGE Focus Editions: Successful focus groups: advancing the state of the art. Thousand Oaks (CA): SAGE Publications Ltd. p. 3-19. DOI: 10.4135/9781483349008.
Perry, H.B. 2017. Information literacy in the sciences: faculty perception of undergraduate student skill. College & Research Libraries 78(7):964–977. DOI: 10.5860/crl.78.7.964.
Porter, J.A., Wolbach, K.C., Purzycki, C.B., Bowman, L.A., Agbada, E. & Mostrom, A.M. 2010. Integration of information and scientific literacy: promoting literacy in undergraduates. CBE - Life Sciences Education 9(4):536–542. DOI: 10.1187/cbe.10-01-0006.
Shanahan, M.C. 2008. Transforming information search and evaluation practices of undergraduate students. International Journal of Medical Informatics 77(8):518–526. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2007.10.004.
Winterman, B. 2009. Building better biology undergraduates through information literacy integration. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship 58. DOI: 10.5062/F4736NT6.
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2019 Catherine Lantz, Paula R Dempsey
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.