Cardiff University | Prifysgol Caerdydd ORCA
Online Research @ Cardiff 
WelshClear Cookie - decide language by browser settings

A systematic review of information literacy programs in higher education: effects of faceto- face, online, and blended formats on student skills and views

Weightman, Alison, Farnell, Damian, Morris, Delyth, Strange, Heather and Hallam, Gillian 2017. A systematic review of information literacy programs in higher education: effects of faceto- face, online, and blended formats on student skills and views. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 12 (3) , pp. 20-55. 10.18438/B86W90

[img]
Preview
PDF - Accepted Post-Print Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution No Derivatives.

Download (1MB) | Preview

Abstract

Objective – Evidence from systematic reviews a decade ago suggested that face-to-face and online methods to provide information literacy training in universities were equally effective in terms of skills learnt, but there was a lack of robust comparative research. The objectives of this review were (1) to update these findings with the inclusion of more recent primary research; (2) to further enhance the summary of existing evidence by including studies of blended formats (with components of both online and face-to-face teaching) compared to single format education; and (3) to explore student views on the various formats employed. Methods – Authors searched seven databases along with a range of supplementary search methods to identify comparative research studies, dated January 1995 to October 2016, exploring skill outcomes for students enrolled in higher education programs. There were 33 studies included, of which 19 also contained comparative data on student views. Where feasible, meta-analyses were carried out to provide summary estimates of skills development and a thematic analysis was completed to identify student views across the different formats. Results – A large majority of studies (27 of 33; 82%) found no statistically significant difference between formats in skills outcomes for students. Of 13 studies that could be included in a meta-analysis, the standardized mean difference (SMD) between skill test results for face-to-face versus online formats was -0.01 (95% confidence interval -0.28 to 0.26). Of ten studies comparing blended to single delivery format, seven (70%) found no statistically significant difference between formats, and the remaining studies had mixed outcomes. From the limited evidence available across all studies, there is a potential dichotomy between outcomes measured via skill test and assignment (course work) which is worthy of further investigation. The thematic analysis of student views found no preference in relation to format on a range of measures in 14 of 19 studies (74%). The remainder identified that students perceived advantages and disadvantages for each format but had no overall preference. Conclusions – There is compelling evidence that information literacy training is effective and well received across a range of delivery formats. Further research looking at blended versus single format methods, and the time implications for each, as well as comparing assignment to skill test outcomes would be valuable. Future studies should adopt a methodologically robust design (such as the randomized controlled trial) with a large student population and validated outcome measures.

Item Type: Article
Date Type: Publication
Status: Published
Schools: Dentistry
Information Services
Subjects: L Education > L Education (General)
Z Bibliography. Library Science. Information Resources > Z665 Library Science. Information Science
Publisher: University of Alberta
ISSN: 1715-720X
Date of First Compliant Deposit: 19 September 2017
Date of Acceptance: 2 August 2017
Last Modified: 28 Dec 2018 22:33
URI: http://orca.cf.ac.uk/id/eprint/104811

Citation Data

Cited 7 times in Scopus. View in Scopus. Powered By Scopus® Data

Actions (repository staff only)

Edit Item Edit Item

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

View more statistics
http://orca.cf.ac.uk/104811/
orca.cf.ac.uk
crawl=CC-MAIN-2019-26
35658
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:D5FEEDII7QDMCCUD4ZQ2BW2SOUFVUATV
<urn:uuid:585300b8-0d35-4e21-84a8-042be3768d30>
2019-06-24T14:08:07Z
131.251.255.56
application/xhtml+xml
sha1:M2RDUAPLCUQONMRGZKGYNPAA37SXPQVX
<urn:uuid:dc293253-88bd-414d-8d79-5200a68be33e>
http://orca.cf.ac.uk/104811/
response
<urn:uuid:2cae53e8-2814-4628-8ae8-b881e1a6f7dd>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2019-26
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for June 2019
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-146-47-206.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.15 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.1-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: http://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/