Hi,

KPI, as I understand it, comes from the organisational domain and
encapsulate the goals of the organisation and are measureable.  An
application of this approach to libraries can be found at
http://www.library.qut.edu.au/pubspolicies/strategicplan_kpi_wallchart_2003_2006.pdf .
However, although there is a section on delivering information literacy,
they are brief and there is a great deal more on the boader goals of the
academic library in general - maybe that was what was required.

Shifting the topic to a related area I would be interested in how people
test/measure people's information literacy and their views on the approaches
taken.

One approach is the checklist.

The ACRL list of learning outcomes still seems a good base for developing a
check list for measuring information literacy in the sense that it defines
goals for information literacy.  Knowling these one could measure how
successful one had been at delivering skills i.e. test the trainee.  The
ACRL standards can be found at
http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlstandards/informationliteracycompetency.htm#stan
and could be converted into a check list.

Susie Anretta's (2005) recent book 'Information Literacy: A practitioners
guide' published in Oxford by Chandos Publishing, provides a diagnostic
questionnaire that can be used to 'measure' a person's information literacy.
A set of questions covering a topic indicate the level of knowledge in a
particular area or sub-set of information literacy.

Although these tests are obviously useful, I have reservations about the
check list approach and wonder what others think.  Here is my view.

Neither ACRL standards and outcomes nor Susie's test tackle the situatedness
of learning because of their generic nature.  In fact they do not intend to,
hence this is not a criticism but introduces the question of whether
attention to measurement may have negative implications, especially with
regard to information literacy.  Let me explain.  Information literacy,
although following broad similarities, has distinct characteristics in terms
of knowledge, attitudes and skills according to the roles, tasks, knowledge,
learning objectives and learning styles of different people.  For example it
will not be same for an experimental scientist, a humanities scholar, a
person dealing with their own critical medical condition or a chief
executive.  Nor will it be learnt and applied in same way by a novice,
expert, a holist, a serialist, a visualiser etc. Therefore to assume it is
generic disguises the fact that unless learning is connected to a
recognisable context and helps achieve relevant aims and objectives i.e. it
is applied, and also relates to the characterisitics of the individual, the
depth of learning is likely to be shallow.

As mentioned above KPI encapsulates goals.  These goals will be different in
different contexts.  Seeking a generic approach to measuring whether
information literacy training has been successful is obviously necessary and
useful, but I think we need to be wary of taking a too mechanisitic,
behaviourist, view of information literacy.  Check boxes that 'measure'
information literacy minimise the importance of the individual,
experiential, constructivist nature of learning.  People may learn 'correct'
responses with regard to information literacy tests but if the training has
not related to their learning needs, will they make sense of it, internalise
it and be able to apply that knowledge to different situations?

The check box approach also has the danger of presenting a simplistic view
of information literacy, which may be useful, but may be counterproductive
(check box ticked, done that, now move on) in terms of persuading other
people of the need to devote sufficient time to developing this knowledge
and associated skills.  This is evident in many models of information
literacy that ignore the motivational issues of information literacy as well
as the complexity of the thinking skills associated with the information
literacy process, such as setting goals, conceptualising,
deductive/inductive reasoning, categorising, synthesising, critical
reflection etc. etc.

Sorry to go on but am currently developing an information literacy training
course, in conjunction with a PhD student, which tries to integrate
knowledge about the learning process, information seeking behaviour and
information literacy as well as the practical aspects of delivery and
assessment.  This will be implemented in Tanzania in April - hence uppermost
in my mind.

What methods have been used to evalaute information literacy?  How do these
relate to differences in the individual and the domain?

It would be an interesting and worthwhile project for someone to review
current practice for evaluating information literacy.  Perhaps it has
already been done?

Best wishes,

Mark


----- Original Message -----
From: "Rachel Bell" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2005 2:52 PM
Subject: KPIs for Information Skills Delivery


Dear all,

Here at the University of Nottingham we are reviewing our Key Performance
Indicators.

We have not previously used KPIs relating to the provision and delivery of
Information Skills / Literacy by library staff. We are keen to do so,
however, as this represents a key aspect of the role of the subject teams
within the organisation.

I would be very interested to hear from any institutions who already use /
have considered using KPIs relating to this area, particularly in respect of
what data has been felt to provide a representative and accurate measurement
of successful delivery.

Best wishes,

Rachel Bell

Rachel Bell
Education Librarian
Academic Services Section
Research and Learning Resources Division
Information Services
Djanogly LRC
University of Nottingham
Jubilee Campus
Wollaton Road
Nottingham
NG8 1BB

Tel:     0115 9514559
Email:  [log in to unmask]


This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
may still contain software viruses, which could damage your computer system:
you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the
University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.