Hello everyone,
I have come up with a plan to help teaching staff with student’s information literacy. I have persuaded a programme lead that it is a good idea and he is giving it a go. However, it might not be a good idea, or there may be side effects
that I just haven’t thought of.
Someone must have done this already. If you have , could you let me know what went wrong?
Regards
Paul
The plan is that you improve information literacy by adding a risk matrix to it. In the matrix the two axes are 1) severity if it happens, and 2) the likelihood of it happening. Both are rated one to four and you multiply the numbers together
to get some sort of score that allows you to weight the risks.
In this plan you replace the axes with 1) Reliability ( crudely speaking for UG provenance and date published) and 2) Relevance. I would rate one aàd and the other 1à4,
just to make it simpler to read. This model will work for Harvard, less so for Vancouver or the other footnote based ones.
The students then do a three column table for the first version of their reference list.
The reference in Harvard style |
Reliability |
Relevance |
|
|
|
They take this to the module lead during any surgery session. The module lead can then see what they are using as references, if they have formatted them correctly, and also how reliable/relevant the student thinks that they are. I don’t
think that this adds much to the workload for the ML.