Presented at LILAC 2008

1. Set for Success… developing researchers’
information literacy skills
Helen Howard
Information Literacy Team Leader
Leeds University Library

2. University Library
Set for Success…
Developing researchers’ IL skills:
 Our strategy
 Our journey
 Staff development
 Future plans & challenges

3. University Library
Background
 Sir Gareth Roberts Set for Success Review
2002:
 found a mismatch between graduate / PG skills
and skills needed by employers
 recommended: “at least 2 weeks dedicated
training a year, principally in transferable skills”
 “Roberts” money available to Faculties and
Central Services
 New Vice Chancellor’s vision for research at
Leeds

4. University Library
Research training and the Library
In 2003:
 Little provision of IL training for PhD students
within Faculties
 Literature searching skills rarely taught
 No clear strategy (despite IL Strategy for UGs
/ taught PGs agreed in 2003)
 Library’s open workshops very popular with
PhD students

5. University Library
“Roberts” money and the Library
 Library formed links with Graduate Training
and Support (GT&S) who provided:
 Inside knowledge of strategic developments
 Access and input to PhD student survey
 Promotion of library training to students
 Advice on how we might move forward
 The money!
 Library sought Roberts funding in 2004

6. University Library
Our Strategy
IL: focus on PhDs
Form key partnerships
Knit into / input to Uni initiatives
Raise profile of IL with researchers
Research and develop
IL training / support
for researchers
Make most of
existing IL provision

7. University Library
Our Journey - phase 1
 Research Training Officer appointed f/t 18
months
 Investigate existing IL training provision for PhD
students
 Literature review
 Best practice in other HE institutions
 Research Student Needs Analysis Survey 2005
 Developed PhD training course 2005
 Piloted 2005-06

8. University Library
Finding and managing information for
your PhD: ½ day workshop
 Pre-workshop assessment
 Common concerns
 Sources of information
 Selecting keywords & building a search
 Managing information
 Plagiarism
 Tracking academic discussions
select 1 or
2 activities

9. University Library
Why was the workshop designed in this way?
 Based on good practice seen elsewhere
 Based on needs identified in our students
 Learner-focused: tailored to and driven by the
user
 Less formal than some of our traditional
teaching
 More variety in our teaching methods

10. University Library
Pre-workshop assessment
 Testing e.g. plagiarism, boolean, search
methods
 Self-assessment ratings e.g. search
strategies experience, updating activities
 Practical information for trainers e.g.PhD title,
Endnote usage
 Students think about their skills & habits
 Trainers find out about their needs & abilities

11. University Library
What did the pre-workshop assessment reveal?
Which of the following do you think PhD students scored best at?
Searching the
Library catalogue
Understanding of
basic plagiarism
Understanding how
Boolean operators
work
How to obtain
theses from other
universities

12. University Library
What did the pre-workshop assessment reveal?
 Good results
 Basic plagiarism: over 90% good understanding
 Boolean operators: 75% could match correctly
 Search techniques: 72% understood wildcard /
phrase searching
 Search engines: nearly 80% understood limitation
in terms of web coverage

13. University Library
What did the pre-workshop assessment reveal?
 Poor results:
 Theses: over 70% did not know how to obtain
 Library Catalogue: 40% could not search correctly
for a journal in the library catalogue
 Keeping up-to-date: about 50% had no strategy
 Reference Management software: 50% aware but
had not used; 25% not aware of it

14. University Library
How did PhD students assess themselves?
How do you think students responded to this question:
“Which of the following statements is most like you?”
I spend a lot of time
searching for info but
often don’t come up with
the right kind of results
I find it difficult to keep
track of what I have
read and where
I am worried that I
sometimes miss
essential papers
when lit searching
I am confident about
searching for info, but
could be more efficient

15. University Library
How did PhD students assess themselves?
 I am confident about searching for information, but
know I could be more efficient: 36%
 I am worried that I sometimes miss essential papers
when literature searching: 31%
 I find it difficult to keep track of what I have read and
where: 18%
 I spend a lot of time searching for info but often don’t
come up with the right kind of results: 15%

16. University Library
Common Anxieties
Which of the following aspects of information literacy do you think most
commonly worry research students?
Systematic literature
searching
Managing
information
Which information
sources to use
Missing out
key papers

17. University Library
Common Anxieties
• Which information resources to use
“What are our databases, i.e. business and economics”
• Systematic literature searching
“How can I organise my lit searching so it is clear and
systematic and so I don't forget what I have looked at
and what I haven't”
• Missing out key papers
“How can I be certain I have a comprehensive search?”
• Managing information
“How can I manage downloaded papers so that I can
retrieve information quickly?”

18. University Library
Survey of researchers’ attitudes to training
 Barriers to participation:
 Very focused on time needed for high quality research-
thinking, analysing, investigating
 Other commitments (teaching, work, family etc.)
 Priorities are boosting publication record, a permanent
academic post (not building generic skills)
 Most likely to participate if:
 Recommended by supervisor / PI / senior academics
 Gaining new skills of direct relevance
 Providing something to add to CV
 Training is short, focused and practical

19. University Library
Was the ½ day workshop the best approach?
Given the comments received from researchers
and in your experience, which do you is the
best approach?
Workshops 1 to 1s

20. University Library
Benefits of this approach to research training
 Practical nature of sessions appealed
 Brought group of PhDs together:
 peer support
 overlapping PhD areas discovered
 User-focus and subject divisions meant it felt
more individualised
 More time efficient than seeing PhDs 1 to 1
 Pre-training assessment results revealed a
number of common weak IL areas

21. University Library
Additional IL Support for researchers
 Key open workshops badged for PhDs:
 Copyright
 Current awareness
 Dissertations and theses
 Endnote
 Making the most of what was already on offer
 Elements therefore not included in half-day
workshop

22. University Library
Crossroads: where next?
 Research and development phase completed
 Funding beyond Sep 2006 confirmed
 Research Training Officer has expertise in the area
and is confident with the workshop
 But should subject librarians have responsibility for
research training in their areas?
Subject Librarians
Research Training
Officer

23. University Library
Our Journey – phase 2
 Information Literacy Officer appointed
 Sept 2006 onwards; 0.5 FTE
 Allowing roll-out to all Faculties
 ILO delivers UG training on behalf of Faculty
Team Librarians (FTLs = subject librarians)
 ILO delivers many general IL workshops
 FTLs deliver training to PhDs
 FTLs best placed (subject knowledge) but some
need to embrace new teaching practices

24. University Library
Teaching Methods: ½ day workshop
 Mixed learning & teaching methods:
 Presentations
 Group work & discussion
 Mindmapping
 E-learning activities
 Self-directed learning
 User-driven sessions:
 More flexibility
 Less control

25. University Library
Staff Development
 FTLs involved at each stage of research and
development:
 Initial discussions into content of workshop
 Sharing of RTO’s outputs
 Small number involved in pilot phase, so
influenced how workshop developed

26. University Library
Staff Development
 Each Faculty Team received ½ day training
session with RTO:
 Explain rationale behind workshop
 Practical info on how to deliver the workshop
 Experience of new tools / techniques

27. University Library
Feedback
“The plagiarism
section was the
most
enlightening”
“it gave specific
advice on
searching!
Incredible”
“Great, been a
student for 7
years, and still
learned stuff!”
“The bit on tracing
academic discussion
was really good, but all
of it was useful”
“Makes things quicker”

28. University Library
IL for Researchers: Our Strategy Revisited
Form key partnerships:
GT&S & Faculty Reps
Researcher Round Table
Knit into / input to Uni initiatives: IL is
core part of PhD courses run by GT&S
Raise profile of IL with researchers:
aim to illustrate importance of IL
Develop IL training for
researchers: 800+ staff &
researchers trained 06/07
Make most of
existing IL provision:
yes, but could do more

29. University Library
What else have we achieved?
 Improved understanding of research student
IL needs
 Courses included as part of Research
Training calendar of events
 Improved skills of library staff / encouraged
updating of teaching practices
 Highlighted ability of library staff to do high
level training & to support research process

30. University Library
Future Plans / Challenges
 Funding:
 how to sustain our efforts when half time post ends Sept 2010
 consider changing our model of teaching delivery
 Online delivery:
 aim to create and evaluate package for researchers in the VLE
 Expanding programme:
 develop a follow-up course for PhDs later in their research
 provide more IL training for research staff, particularly at early
stage of their career
 Promotion:
 further targetting of existing courses
 improved web pages for research support generally
 encourage supervisors / PIs to recommend our courses

31. University Library
IL for Researchers: collaboration
How can we collaborate better to share best practice and / or
develop initiatives?
Publish literatureVirtual community
Dedicated events Local projects

32. University Library
References
 Roberts, S.G. (2002). SET for Success.
London, HM Treasury: 218