New generation users are adept at locating scholarly articles, thanks to information literacy sessions and tools like Google Scholar, but are they able to interpret and use the information they find? This question has been percolating in the literature and in practice for some time, but has only recently become the subject of research. Student difficulties in using scholarly materials have been ascribed to changing student demographics, open admissions policies, the timing of assignments requiring use of scholarly materials, and general societal decline in ability and appetite for sustained, focused reading.
The authors have worked together for three years to improve student learning in this area, through in-class sessions and assignments offered in a third-year research methods course. Starting from a position that scholarly articles are alien objects, we introduce active reading strategies designed to help students decode the structure, purpose, and jargon common to such communication artefacts. In the Fall of 2011, we surveyed a group of these students, now in their fourth year about their use of scholarly articles, to better understand what students perceive as barriers to their use of academic literature, and see what long-term impact the earlier sessions might have had.
The presentation will briefly describe some of the challenges librarians and other faculty have seen in requiring students to use academic literature before focusing on the evolution of classes developed to overcome some of the barriers, and results from the survey of senior students. Both the classes and the survey provide some directions for improved teaching and further research. Participants will be invited to share their own concerns and strategies to help students read scholarly materials.
Margy MacMillan has worked in information literacy(IL) at Mount Royal University for over 20 years. She has developed program-integrated IL for science and communications programs, as well as a variety of courses and workshops in Arts and Humanities. She has conducted long-term research on the acquisition of IL skills and knowledge through students‘ undergraduate degrees. Her current research and teaching focus is on connecting students to the scholarly conversations in their disciplines through academic texts.
Associate professor Allison Mackenzie, ABC, MBA, teaches Public Relations in the Faculty of Communication Studies at Mount Royal University, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. She is currently researching the relationship between public relations students‘ engagement in community service learning projects and the students‘ development of professional attributes.
Allison’s areas of interest include non-profit communications, new and social media, ethics, and workplace transition and the development of public relations specific professional attributes. Prior to joining Mount Royal University in June 2008, Allison worked for more than two decades as a communicators and public relations practitioner in Calgary.
Interesting insights into reading behaviors of students! #P111 #iatul2012
— IATUL 2012 (@iatul2012) June 4, 2012
#iatul2012 #P111, Margy Macmillan: Enjoyed a great presentation! Thanks.
— Tina Hohmann (@guacamole37) June 4, 2012
Jargons and language – top difficulties and complaints faced by undergraduate students when reading scholarly articles #P111 #iatul2012
— IATUL 2012 (@iatul2012) June 4, 2012
#p111 #iatul2012 teaching ug students how to read scholarly articles.
— Phoebe Lim Choon Lan (@PhoebeLimCL) June 4, 2012
Margy MacMillan: Students do not challenge scholarly articles enough. #P111 #iatul2012
— IATUL 2012 (@iatul2012) June 4, 2012
Margy MacMillan: Undergraduates students are less adept at reading than they think. #P111 #iatul2012
— IATUL 2012 (@iatul2012) June 4, 2012
Heres a question – should a librarian teach students reading strategies? Why? Ok. 2 questions. So, any thoughts?
Undergrads can read scholarly articles. Can they? I like the way Margy and Alison taught them what to look out for, breaking students into small groups, the “alien” example (this was cool). What was difficult for the students? Surprise. Reading it, of course. Hey, I hated the language, jargon, tables of statistics, too. Students also found it easier to “describe” than to “critique”. What did the students got out of it? Reading strategies. Nice.