CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 166Library Science and Information LiteracyLibrary Science and InformationInformation Science and Libraries

Information literacy assessment: Where do we start?

Open access
Walsh, Andrew·2009·Journal of Librarianship and Information Science
DOI 10.1177/0961000608099896
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Interest in developing ways to assess information literacy has been growing for several years. Many librarians have developed their own tools to assess aspects of information literacy and have written articles to share their experiences. This article reviews the literature and offers readers a flavour of the methods being used for assessment: those which are popular within the field and also illustrative examples from some of the case studies found, particularly where they show how the reliability and validity of the methods have been considered. It does not aim to be an exhaustive list of case studies or methods, but a representative sample to act as a `jumping off point' for librarians considering introducing assessment of information literacy into their own institutions.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0961000608099896

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Attempts to measure information literacy overwhelmingly use simplistic tools such as multiple choice questionnaires which often fail to show their validity.

    “If we look at attempts to measure information literacy, we see an overwhelming use of simplistic tools such as multiple choice questionnaires which often fail to show their validity (Walsh, 2009) in measuring the complex and contextual dependent nature of information literacy.”

    From Playful Information Literacy: Play and information Literacy in Higher Education (2015) · cites this paper as Walsh, 2009

    The Discussion of results says multiple-choice questions were the most popular assessment method, used by over a third of the studies—not an overwhelming majority. The Multiple Choice Questionnaire section says most studies made little attempt to check instrument reliability or validity, but it also describes substantial variation in test quality and notable exceptions. The claim captures the validity concern but overstates how dominant and uniformly simplistic these tools were. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 44

  1. Ackerson, L. Young, V. (1995) Evaluation of student research paper bibliographies: refining evaluation criteria. Research Strategies, 13(2), pp. 80-93
  2. Burkhardt, J. (2007) Assessing library skills: A first step to information literacy. Portal: Libraries and the academy, 7(1), pp. 25-49
  3. Cameron, L. Wise, S. Lottridge, S. (2007) The development and validation of the information literacy test. College and Research Libraries, 68(3) pp. 229-236
  4. Choinski, E. Mark, A. Murphey, M. (2003) Assessment with rubrics: An efficient and objective means of assessing student outcomes in an information resources class. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 3(4), pp. 563-575
  5. Colborn N. Cordell R. (1998) Moving from Subjective to Objective Assessments of Your Instruction Program. Reference Services Review, 26(3-4), pp. 125-137
  6. Currie, M. Goettler, E. McCaskill, S. (1982) Evaluating the Relationship Between Library Skills and Library Instruction. Canadian Library Journal, 39(1), pp. 35-37
  7. D'Angelo, B. (2001) Integrating and assessing information competencies in a gateway course. Reference Services Review, 29(4), pp. 282-293
  8. Daugherty, T. Carter, E. (1997) Assessment of outcome-focussed library instruction in psychology. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 24(1), pp. 29-33
  9. Dunn, K. (2002) Assessing information literacy skills in the California State University: A progress report. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 28(1/2), pp. 26-35
  10. Dykeman, A. King, B. (1983) Term paper analysis: A proposal for evaluating bibliographic instruction. Research Strategies, 1(1), pp. 14-21
  11. Emmett, A. Emde, J. (20070 Assessing information literacy skills using the ACRL standards as a guide. Reference Services Review, 35(2), pp. 210-229
  12. Emmons, M. Martin, W. (2002) Engaging conversation: Evaluating the contribution of library instruction to the quality of student research. College and Research Libraries, 63(6), pp. 545-560
  13. Fiegen, A. Cherry, B. Watson, K. (2002) Reflections on collaboration: learning outcomes and information literacy assessment in the business curriculum. Reference Services Review, 30(4), pp. 307- 318
  14. Flashpohler, M. (2003) Information literacy program assessment; one small college takes the big plunge. Reference Services Review, 31(2), pp. 129-140
  15. Fourie, I. Niekerk, D. (1999) Using portfolio assessment in a module in research information skills. Education for Information, 17(4), pp. 333-352
  16. Green, R. Bowser, M. (2006) Observations from the field: sharing a literature review rubric. Journal of Library Administration, 45(1/2) pp.185-202
  17. Gross, M. Latham, D. (2007) Attaining information literacy: An investigation of the relationship between skill level, self-estimates of skill, and library anxiety. Library & Information Science Research, 29(3), pp. 332-353.
  18. Halttunen, K. Järvelin, K. (2005) Assessing learning outcomes in two information retrieval environments. Information Processing and Management, 41(4), pp. 949-972
  19. Helmke, J. Matthies, B (2004) Assessing freshman library skills and attitude before program development: One library's experience. College and Undergraduate Libraries, 11(2), pp. 29-49
  20. Houlson, V. (2007) Getting results from one-shot instruction: A workshop for first year students. College and Undergraduate Libraries, 14(1) pp.89-108
  21. Hovde, K. (2000) Check the citation: library instruction and the student paper bibliographies. Research Strategies, 17(1) pp. 3-9
  22. Ivanitskaya, L. (2006) Health information literacy and competencies of information age students; Results from the interactive online Research Readiness Self-Assessment (RRSA). Journal of Medical Internet research, 8(2), pp. 2-12
  23. Ivanitskaya, L. Laus, R. Marie Casey, A. (2004) Research readiness Self-Assessment: Assessing students' research skills and attitudes. Journal of Library Administration, 41(1/2), pp. 167-183
  24. Johnston, B. Webber, S. (2003) Information literacy in higher education: a review and case study. Studies in Higher Education, 28 (3), pp. 335-352
  25. Knight, L. (2006) Using rubrics to assess information literacy. Reference Services Review, 34(1), pp. 43-55
  26. Knight, L. (2002) The role of assessment in library user education. Reference Services Review, 30(1), pp. 15-24
  27. Machet, M. (2005) An evaluation of information literacy courses offered at a distance education university. Mousaion, 23(2) pp. 180-195
  28. Maughan, P. (2001) Assessing information literacy among undergraduate: A discussion of the literature and the University of California-Berkley Assessment Experience. College and Research Libraries, 62(1) pp. 71-85
  29. Muiherrin, E. Kelly, K. Fishman, D. Orr, G. (2004) Information literacy and the distant student: One university's experience developing, delivering, and maintaining an online required information literacy course. Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 9(1/2), pp. 21-36
  30. Noe, N. Bishop, B. (2005) Assessing Auburn University library's Tiger Information Literacy Tutorial (TILT). Reference Services Review, 33(2), pp. 173-187
  31. Novotny, E. Cahoy, E. (2006) If we teach, do they learn? The impact of instruction on online catalog search strategies. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 6(2), pp. 155-167
  32. Nutefall, J. (2005) Paper trail: One method of information literacy assessment. Research Strategies, 20(1/2), pp. 89-98
  33. O'Connor, L. Radcliff, C. Gedeon, J. (2002) Applying systems design and item response theory to the problem of measuring information literacy skills. College and Research Libraries, 63(6), pp. 528-543
  34. Ondrusek, A. Dent, V. Bonadie-Joseph, I. Williams, C. (2005) A longitudinal study of the development and evaluation of an information literacy test. Reference Services Review, 33(4), pp. 388-417
  35. Riddle, J. Hartman, K. (2000) But are they learning anything? Designing an instrument of first year library instruction. College and Undergraduate Libraries, 7(2), pp. 59-69
  36. Roberts, J. (2004) Senior student nurses information seeking skills: a comparative study. Nurse Education Today, 24(3), pp. 211-218
  37. Robinson, A. Schlegl, K. (2004) Student bibliographies improve when professors provide enforceable guidelines for citations. Portal: libraries and the academy, 4(2), pp. 275-290
  38. Samson, S. Granath, K. (2004) Reading, writing and research: Added value to university first-year experience programs. Reference Services Review, 32(2), pp. 149-156
  39. Samson, S. Millett, M. (2003) The learning environment; First-year students, teaching assistants, and information literacy. Research Strategies, 19(2), pp. 84-98
  40. Scharf, D. Elliot, N. Huey, H. Briller, V. Joshi, K. (2007) Direct assessment of information literacy using writing portfolios. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 33(4) pp. 462-478
  41. Sharma, S. (2007) From chaos to clarity: using the research portfolio to teach and assess information literacy skills. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 33(1) pp.127-135
  42. Sonley, V. Turner, D. Myer, S. Cotton, Y. (2007) Information literacy assessment by portfolio: A case study Reference Services Review, 35(1), pp. 41-70
  43. Tierney, J. (1992) Information literacy and a college library: A continuing experiment. New Directions for Higher Education, 20(2), pp. 63-71
  44. Warner, D. (2003) Programmatic assessment: Turning process into practice by teaching for learning. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 29(3), pp. 169-176

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Walsh, A.
Affiliations
University of Huddersfield (GB)
Corresponding author
Walsh, Andrew
ORCID
Walsh, Andrew
Venue
Journal of Librarianship and Information Science
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2009-03
Volume
41
Issue
1
Pages
19-28
ISSN
  • 0022-2232 (ISSN-L)
  • 0961-0006
  • 1741-6477
DOI
10.1177/0961000608099896
OpenAlex
W2067523019
Cited by
166
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 13
FWCI
76.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • Journal of Librarianship and Information Science (publishedVersion)
  • University of Huddersfield Repository (University of Huddersfield) (submittedVersion)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (submittedVersion)
  • Huddersfield Research Portal (University of Huddersfield) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Library Science and Information Literacy
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Library Science and Information
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Science and Libraries
Keywords
information literacy, information literacy assessment, assessment instruments, reliability statistics, validity, librarians, case studies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review