Presented at LILAC 2009

1. Trial and error
Sonja Haerkoenen
Stephen Thornton
Cardiff University
Student responses to different
approaches of embedding
information literacy education
across five departments

2. Sonja Haerkoenen, Stephen Thornton, Cardiff
Overview
School of European Studies
IL setup
Politics assessment
 Research trail
 Integrated assignment
General student feedback
 Themes
 Data analysis
Future developments

3. Sonja Haerkoenen, Stephen Thornton, Cardiff
School of European Studies
5 sections
 French
 German
 Hispanic Studies
 Italian
 Politics
5 separate library representatives
5 different organisational structures
5 varying pedagogical approaches

4. Sonja Haerkoenen, Stephen Thornton, Cardiff
IL setup
Dept Setup 2007 Student
nos
2007
Setup 2008 Student
nos
2008
A Lect + Sem (reading
week, mid Nov)
64 Lect + Sem (additional,
mid Oct)
22
B Lect + Sem (end
Oct)
40 Lect + Sem (end Oct) 27
C Sem only (additional,
end April)
5 Lect + Sem (mid Oct) 95
D Lect + Sem (end
Oct)
58 Sem only (end Oct) 45
E Lect + Sem +
Research Trail
(end Nov)
130 Lect + Sem +
Integrated
Assessment (beg
Nov)
120

5. Sonja Haerkoenen, Stephen Thornton, Cardiff
Politics/IL assessment
2007: Research trail to accompany a
standard Politics essay
2008: Integrated assessment

6. Sonja Haerkoenen, Stephen Thornton, Cardiff
Reflective research trail (2007/08)
1. Attach answers to the following questions to your essay. Remember, this
part of the assignment is worth as much as the essay itself. There is no
word limit.
2. In preparing for essays, in addition to using work identified on the reading
list in the Introduction to Government course-kit, you have been
encouraged to find relevant items that are not on this reading list. Identify
three items from your bibliography that were not on this reading list.
There will be more marks available to those who display a variety of
sources of information used. (Different sources of information include
journal articles, chapters in an edited volume, websites, textbooks,
newspaper articles, e-books, etc.)
3. Taking the list you have created in response to Question 1, explain how
you discovered the existence of each of these items.
4. You have been encouraged to use databases such as Web of
Knowledge, JSTOR and ASSIA. Identify one item from the three already
listed as one you discovered on a database. Explain the steps you took to
locate a full text version of this item, noting any keywords used.
5. Identify an item of information you thought had the potential to be useful
when researching this essay, but, in the end, you decided not to cite in
your essay. Explain what factors led you to make this decision.
6. Reflect on each of the three items you identified in response to Question
1. In particular, explain what each added to your essay.

7. Sonja Haerkoenen, Stephen Thornton, Cardiff
Typical feedback
 …it forced me to use other sources such as journals and
e-books which otherwise I probably wouldn’t have used
 [I] found myself backtracking after my essay to artificially
justify/change my sources to ‘fit’ the criteria
Summary
Many suggested that the exercise was useful, but a
minority were less convinced, a number suggesting that
the time and effort involved meant a ‘sacrifice’ in the ‘far
more relevant’ activity of writing an academic essay.

8. Sonja Haerkoenen, Stephen Thornton, Cardiff
Integrated assignment (2008/09)
A Choose one topic from this list:
a) the role of the state
b) direct democracy
c) political culture
B i) Locate an article from a reputable journal that is relevant to your topic (N.B. it should not
be an article on your reading list).
ii) Provide a full reference for this article using the Harvard referencing system.
iii) Explain why this source of information is reputable, backing responses with evidence.
iv) Summarize the main points and arguments made in this article.
C i)Locate a different article from a reputable journal that is relevant to your topic (N.B. as
before, it should not be an article on your reading list).
ii) Provide a full reference for this article using the Harvard referencing system.
iii) Explain why this source of information is reputable, backing responses with evidence.
iv) Summarize the main points and arguments made in this article.
D i) Locate an article from a reputable online news source or organisation that is relevant
to your topic (N.B. again, it should not be an article on your reading list).
ii) Provide a full reference for this article using the Harvard referencing system.
iii) Explain why this source of information is reputable, backing responses with evidence.
iv) Summarize the main points and arguments made in this article.
E i)Make a case to support what you consider to be the most convincing argument made in
the articles you have reviewed (this case should include evidence, elements of comparison,
and references).

9. Sonja Haerkoenen, Stephen Thornton, Cardiff
Typical feedback
 The assignment was a challenge, very different from the other
essays and the skills addressed within it such as reputability of
sources made me more aware of the sources I used in others
essays.
 The workshop was useful and extremely helpful. I enjoyed the
presentations in the lectures. The assignment was fun and
helpful in terms of evaluating the information. The layout of the
assignment was really helpful.
 The workshop was particularly useful in using the internet for
research purposes. The assignment helped to introduce the
types of essay needed at university.
 I found the workshop to help with the assignment very useful,
especially the help with researching (using journals, etc.) and
instructions on how to write a bibliography.
 The assignment was more useful as it gave me some ideas
about why I should use sources, something which I didn’t
question before.

10. Sonja Haerkoenen, Stephen Thornton, Cardiff
General student feedback 1
Most students value links to assignments
2007
• Would have liked it to be linked more strongly to our
essays.
• Would have been more useful if able to put it in practice
[with an actual essay title].
2008
• This session [Politics] was a lot more useful than the
language sessions.
• The fact that we could directly talk to the lecturer so as to
know what we could or couldn’t do in the assignment.
• On-hand assistance from two people.
• Able to start assignment.
• Specifically linked to assignment.

11. Sonja Haerkoenen, Stephen Thornton, Cardiff
General student feedback 2
Most students want subject specific sessions
• [I liked that they] were subject specific.
• New info (compared to Spanish – subject
specific).
• The sessions were specific to my subject areas.
• I was able to find specific information for my
subject + ask questions about any problems I
had in finding articles etc.

12. Sonja Haerkoenen, Stephen Thornton, Cardiff
General student feedback 3
Most students ask for early, embedded sessions
2007
• Put them into seminar sessions like all the other subjects –
not in reading week (kind of defeats the object…).
• [I disliked] the fact it’s in my free time.
• Would have liked them to take place a bit earlier in the
academic year (September or October).
• I feel it should have been covered earlier.
• Evidence from attendance records
o Dept C, 2007: approx. 0.04% attendance for seminars additional
to timetable at the end of the second semester
o Dept C, 2008: 86% attendance for embedded lecture + seminars
o Dept D, 2007: 50% attendance for lecture + seminars in reading
week
o Dept D, 2008: 18% attendance for seminars additional to
timetable

13. Sonja Haerkoenen, Stephen Thornton, Cardiff
General student feedback 4
Student opinion split regarding IL setup
• [I liked the] practical work combined with lecture.
• [I disliked] the theory.
• Very clear. Put lecture into practice.
• [I disliked the] separation of lecture and seminar.
• Lecture + seminar complimented each other effectively.
• Friendly, informal, very effective learning.
• Evidence from student feedback for Dept. D
o Feedback question: “The presenters introduced the topics
covered clearly and effectively.”
o 2007: 92% agree or strongly agree
o 2008: 82% agree or strongly agree
⇒ No lecture in 2008 resulted in information overload in
seminar.

14. Sonja Haerkoenen, Stephen Thornton, Cardiff
General student feedback 5
Many students prefer structured sessions
2007
• Well structured, good feedback.
• Worksheet clearly worked out, instructions given.
• We went through the exercises afterwards which made
things more clear.
2008
• Personal research time was a little unstructured.
• They presumed a prior exposure.
• A little broad – just left alone. Perhaps some examples
for us to find first.

15. Sonja Haerkoenen, Stephen Thornton, Cardiff
Student feedback summary
Overall very positive
 86% would recommend attending these
sessions to colleagues (2007: 79%).
 90% found the sessions useful (2007: 88%).
 93% thought the topics were covered clearly
and effectively (2007: 95%).
 93% felt the sessions included everything
they set out to cover at the beginning (2007:
91%).
 98% agreed that the venues and equipment
were satisfactory (2007: 97%).

16. Sonja Haerkoenen, Stephen Thornton, Cardiff
Future developments
Politics 2009
 Lecture to be team-taught and to be used to
introduce assignment
 More time during seminar to be used for
structured exercises
Discuss potential for follow-up IL in year 2
Gather feedback from academic staff on
improvements in students‘ work
Investigate formalised assessments
and/or collaborative teaching School-wide

17. Sonja Haerkoenen, Stephen Thornton, Cardiff
Questions?
Sonja Haerkoenen
HaerkoenenS@cardiff.ac.uk
Stephen Thornton
ThorntonSL@cardiff.ac.uk