The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 53 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Best methods for evaluating educational impact: a comparison of the efficacy of commonly used measures of library instruction
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVES AND BACKGROUND: Libraries are increasingly called upon to demonstrate student learning outcomes and the tangible benefits of library educational programs. This study reviewed and compared the efficacy of traditionally used measures for assessing library instruction, examining the benefits and drawbacks of assessment measures and exploring the extent to which knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors actually paralleled demonstrated skill levels. METHODS: An overview of recent literature on the evaluation of information literacy education addressed these questions: (1) What evaluation measures are commonly used for evaluating library instruction? (2) What are the pros and cons of popular evaluation measures? (3) What are the relationships between measures of skills versus measures of attitudes and behavior? Research outcomes were used to identify relationships between measures of attitudes, behaviors, and skills, which are typically gathered via attitudinal surveys, written skills tests, or graded exercises. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Results provide useful information about the efficacy of instructional evaluation methods, including showing significant disparities between attitudes, skills, and information usage behaviors. This information can be used by librarians to implement the most appropriate evaluation methods for measuring important variables that accurately demonstrate students' attitudes, behaviors, or skills.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“past work has identified that effectively structured partnerships between campus librarians and STEM faculty can support student learning and scientific literacy (Scaramozzino, 2010; Schilling and Applegate, 2012).”
From Reading Primary Scientific Literature: Approaches for Teaching Students in the Undergraduate STEM Classroom (2023) · cites this paper as Schilling and Applegate, 2012
Citations
Cites
The Association of American Medical Colleges
ZAPFFE, F. C. (1938) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/00001888-193801000-00007 · Cited by 5,527
Assessing Student Learning: A Common Sense Guide
Suskie, L. (2004) · Cited by 713
Assessment Essentials: Planning, Implementing, and Improving Assessment in Higher Education
Palomba, C. A., & Banta, T. W. (1999) · Cited by 617
Assessment Essentials: Planning, Implementing, and Improving Assessment in Higher Education
GIBSON, C. A. (2000) · The Journal of Academic Librarianship · doi:10.1016/s0099-1333(00)00082-3 · Cited by 505
Quantitative Measures of Communication in Science: A Critical Review
Edge, D. O. (1979) · History of Science · doi:10.1177/007327537901700202 · Cited by 287
Robbins, J. B. (1992) · Journal of Library Administration · doi:10.1300/j111v16n01_02 · Cited by 205
Maughan, P. D. (2001) · College & Research Libraries · doi:10.5860/crl.62.1.71 · Cited by 203
Dangers and Opportunities: A Conceptual Map of Information Literacy Assessment Approaches
Oakleaf, M. (2008) · portal Libraries and the Academy · doi:10.1353/pla.0.0011 · Cited by 167
Library instruction and college student self-efficacy in electronic information searching
Ren, W.-H. (2000) · The Journal of Academic Librarianship · doi:10.1016/s0099-1333(00)00138-5 · Cited by 150
Fidel, R. (1985) · Online Review · doi:10.1108/eb024176 · Cited by 129
Cited by
Mianda, S., & Voce, A. S. (2018) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-018-3561-4 · Cited by 91
Effectiveness of tutorials for promoting educational integrity: a synthesis paper
Stoesz, B. M., & Yudintseva, A. (2018) · International Journal for Educational Integrity · doi:10.1007/s40979-018-0030-0 · Cited by 90
Embedded Academic Librarianship: A Review of the Literature
Schulte, S. J. (2012) · Evidence Based Library and Information Practice · doi:10.18438/eblip.v7i4.17466 · Cited by 66
Purnell, M., Royal, B., & Warton, L. (2020) · Nurse Education Today · doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2020.104585 · Cited by 56
Outcomes Assessment in Undergraduate Information Literacy Instruction: A Systematic Review
Erlinger, A. (2018) · College & Research Libraries · doi:10.5860/crl.79.4.442 · Cited by 55
Metadata
- Authors
- Schilling, K., & Applegate, R.
- Affiliations
- Indiana University Indianapolis (US)
- ORCID
- Applegate, Rachel
- Venue
- Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA
- Published
- 2012-10
- Volume
- 100
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 258-269
- ISSN
- 1536-5050 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-9439
- PMC
- PMC3484955
- OpenAlex
- W1984166682
- Cited by
- 106
- References
- 53
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 62.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Journal of the Medical Library Association JMLA (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- IUScholarWorks (Indiana University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Medical Library Association
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Library Science and Information Literacy
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Library Science and Information
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Information Science and Libraries
- Keywords
- library instruction, information literacy education, teaching evaluation, evaluation metrics, learning outcomes, attitude-behavior relationship, information skills, attitudinal surveys, medical libraries
- MeSH terms
- Computer-Assisted Instruction, Curriculum, Educational Measurement, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Libraries, Medical, Library Science, Teaching, United States, Librarians, Information Storage and Retrieval, Professional Role, Information Dissemination
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Best methods for evaluating educational impact: a comparison of the efficacy of commonly used measures of library instruction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3163/1536-5050.100.4.007
- The paper
- Schilling, K., & Applegate, R. (2012). Best methods for evaluating educational impact: a comparison of the efficacy of commonly used measures of library instruction. Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA. https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.100.4.007