A small group of upper-division undergraduate students were able to find peer-reviewed/scholarly research on their chosen topics, but then seemed to have problems integrating the information they found into their arguments. What does this mean for library instruction? For collection development? Do research-based projects result in student learning?
Kodo Millet PPT made by Ghanshyam bairwa college of Agriculture kumher bhara...
LILAC 2010: They can find it but they don't know what to do with it
1. They can find it, but they don’t know what to do with it: Describing the use of scholarly literature by undergraduate students Stephanie Rosenblatt, California State University, Fullerton Presented at LILAC 2010, Limerick, Ireland
16. Model of College Research Adapted from Carol Kuhlthau’s “Initial Model of the Information Search Process” in Seeking Meaning , 2004. p. 45 by April Cunningham and Allison Carr for SCIL Works 2008. Stages: Getting the Assignment Choosing a Topic The Initial Search (unfocused) Finding a Focus Collecting Information (focused) Completing the Search/ Starting Writing Actions looking for anything on the topic --------------------- looking for information that fits your focus Feelings uncertainty optimism confusion frustration doubt clarity sense of direction confidence relief/ satisfaction or dissatisfaction your interest increases ------------------------------- Thoughts seeing multiple possibilities ---------------------------------- commitment to your focus
18. Adapted from the Association of American Colleges and Universities VALUE Rubrics available at http://www.aacu.org/value/rubric_teams.cfm by Stephanie Rosenblatt, 2010 Integrating Developing Emerging 3 2 1 The student uses and analyzes scholarly literature to effectively accomplish a specific purpose. In this case, the student makes connections between the scholarly literature and his/her own life experiences that have been discussed in the family re-examination paper. (ACRL 3.3.a; 3.4.c;3.4.f;3.4.g; 3.5a; 3.5.b;4.1.c) Information is taken from source(s) with enough interpretation/ evaluation to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis, meaning the student has organized or synthesized the evidence to reveal important patterns or similarities and differences between different sources and between the scholarly literature cited and the focus of his/her paper. The student makes more than three connections between the literature and his/her life experience or that of the interviewees. The connections occur throughout the paper. Information is taken from source(s) with some interpretation/ evaluation, but not enough to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis. The student organizes evidence from the scholarly literature cited, but rarely comments on differences or similarities between different sources or between the literature cited and the focus of the student's paper. The student makes three or fewer connections between the literature and his/her life experience or that of the interviewees. Information is taken from source(s) without any interpretation/ evaluation. The information is fragmented and/or used inappropriately. For example, evidence from the scholarly literature is listed or summarized but is not organized. No connections are made between the literature and the focus of the student's paper. The sources cited may not relate to the paper's focus.
19.
20.
21.
22.
Notas del editor
As you can see, 10 of the students, 50 %, showed evidence of the ability to integrate the scholarly information they discovered into the arguments they made in their papers—to begin thinking like sociologists -- which I believe was the main goal of the assignment. The other half of the students did not.
![[object Object],[object Object],How can we be sure that quality resources = quality papers?]()