Conference papers

Information literacy strategies

LITE Years: Development of an Online Literacy Programme 1996 - 2000

Merrilee Albatis
User education and training co-ordinator, Murdoch University Library, Western Australia

Introduction

Murdoch University's new first year students study Foundation Units, interdisciplinary units designed to introduce them to the university, and equip them with the basic study skills they'll need throughout their studies. Students are encouraged to choose a unit in a subject area different from their programme of study. One area in which the units aim to develop skills, is in the use of the Library and its resources for location and retrieval of information. Nearly 2000 students were enrolled in foundation units in semester 1 2000.

Background

There has been a Library skills component within the Foundation Units since the 1980s, originating with classroom based 'chalk and talk' presentations by the Librarians. Due to increasing student numbers over the years, the classes were replaced in 1990 by a self-paced workbook. When students completed this, they entered their answers into a database which marked their responses, and collated results by unit, tutor and tutorial day and time.

In 1996 as part of an overall review of the foundation units, we took the opportunity to review the library component. At the same time, there was an increasing awareness of the need and importance for students to have a significant degree of information technology (IT) literacy. To reflect this, it was agreed that the library skills component would be expanded to become an online library skills and IT literacy programme. The new programme was to provide students not only with traditional library and research skills, but also to introduce them to standard applications for using the web, e-mail, word processing and spreadsheet packages.

The library was given responsibility for designing and developing the new programme, and providing any IT support that might be needed.

Why opt for an online programme?

The decision to develop an online programme was made for a number of reasons.

• Student numbers were increasing so we needed a programme that could stand-alone, be completed with little intervention from staff and be self-marking.
• External (i.e. remote or distance education) students with appropriate software could also use the programme.
• An online programme could be completed off campus, thereby reducing the pressure on on-campus facilities.
• It could incorporate the internet, which had opened up a vast array of learning opportunities.
• A well-designed online programme could offer a more interactive and stimulating approach than our workbook-based programme.

This decision was also very important because it meant that the library was supporting the major new directions on campus at the time i.e. flexible delivery and development/support of online units.

Format and Requirements

It was agreed that the programme would run over the entire semester and operate in two phases. Phase 1 would cover library and research skills and word processing, and Phase 2 would cover Web, e-mail and spreadsheet skills. The main requirements for the programme were that it be:

• accessible in the first few weeks of Semester 1 1997
• self-directed, requiring minimal staff involvement for students to complete the programme
• available for completion on and off campus
• platform independent
• self assessable
• able to track the progress of up to 2000 students
• able to be completed within the semester
• able to sort results by unit, tutor and tutorial day and time
• easily modified
• available to non Foundation Unit students
• interactive where possible.

Resources

Funding

$5,000 was made available for the project, which was to be used at the discretion of the library for software, programming consultancy, and staff relief to work on the project.

Staff

Responsibility for designing and developing the new programme was given to the library's User Education Committee, a group of four Librarians, which I chaired. We were required to work closely with our two library IT staff members, who were given responsibility for any programming involved, and for supporting and maintaining the new programme.

Software

Once the requirements were clear we began the quest for software to use. We reviewed a number of products for developing online learning packages, explored relevant discussion lists, and undertook some Internet-based literature searches. Although there were online literacy tutorials available, some with self-marking quizzes, our project was somewhat unique because it had to include IT components and provide results for up to 2000 students. The project team (Librarians and IT staff) finally decided to develop an in-house, purpose built programme based on a combination of Web technology and some basic PERL programming for the quizzes and results. Why?

• Our IT members had existing html skills and some PERL programming skills, and our Librarians also had some basic html skills.
• The web was platform independent.
• A number of academic staff were promoting the use of Web technology for building online units and tutorials.
• It was relatively cheap! Web browsers were free, so we didn't have to buy and support new software and new expertise.

Hardware

The number of computers in the library was obviously insufficient to cater for the number of students, but an audit of computing facilities on campus indicated that there would be sufficient computer time available on campus to make the programme viable.

Design and development

We duly named the new programme LibIT i.e. the Library and Information Technology programme. As a project team we met several times to brainstorm ideas for the design of the programme, and a number of existing online tutorials were reviewed as part of this process (Falcon - Bowling Green State University library, Ohio; Welcome to WebLUIS Tutorial - Florida International University Libraries; Welcome to Go for the Gold - James Madison University, Virginia). After consultation with staff from the University's Academic Services Unit (ASU), it was agreed that the programme would be designed around a series of self-paced modules, each utilizing instruction, graphics, simulations, and questions and answers to promote learning.

These self-paced modules are listed below.

Phase 1 Modules

• Module 1: Library procedures, services and collections
• Module 2: Defining and developing your topic
• Module 3: Finding background information
• Module 4: Finding books
• Module 5: Finding journal articles
• Module 6: Evaluating and citing what you have found
• Module 7: An introduction to word processing

Phase 2 Modules

• Module 8: An introduction to the world wide web
• Module 9: An introduction to e-mail
• Module 10: An introduction to spreadsheets

During the design phase it became clear to us that the word processing and spreadsheet modules weren't suited to a simulated approach. We wanted to give students practice in using 'real' applications, so we decided to test their skills by requiring them to reproduce given documents using standard packages. The students would then submit these to their tutors for recording. We also decided to develop word processing and spreadsheet workbooks to help those students with few prior skills.

While we developed the content, our IT members also had to ensure that the programme was compatible for basic level browsers. That way, as many students as possible could complete the programme off campus if they had internet access. To meet the remaining requirements our IT staff decided they would:

• upload the full Foundation Unit details of all new 1997 students from a central database, and store these within the LibIT database
• enter all of the Foundation Unit tutors and tutorial details into the database.

Before students could access the programme they would need to enter their details, and be matched on their student identification number, which was stored in the database. Then they would be allowed to proceed.

The major obstacles we encountered were lack of time and interactivity. It became evident that some of the interactive features we wanted were not going to be possible, because either they would take far more programming expertise or time to develop, or the basic level of browsers we wanted to maintain would not support the level of interactivity required. We also ran out of time to develop really in-depth responses to our questions, and to carry out exhaustive testing of the programme.

Programme implementation

Approximately 1500 students were enrolled across five Foundation Units in Semester 1 of 1997. We included LibIT informational material within the Foundation Unit study guides, and we talked to students about the programme at the first round of lectures. We also sent tutor related material to about 90 tutors, and talked to them during a tutor induction programme in January 1997.

Although the programme started on time, we soon encountered problems. These were mainly of a technical nature. The programme crashed regularly, and the relatively old, slow machines in the library only exacerbated the problem. Also for various reasons (e.g. late enrolments), some students were not matched in the registration process and had to be manually added to the database. Helping students with few computer skills was also very time intensive, but there were only a few of them and they were very appreciative of the assistance. The results were also less than satisfactory, due to students swapping units and selecting the wrong tutor in the registration process etc.

Evaluation

Foundation Unit students, unit coordinators, tutors, library staff, and ASU staff were all asked for their comments once the programme was over. The feedback varied considerably, from the very positive to the very negative.

It was of no surprise to us that most of the negative feedback from students related to the technical problems. Some students also found the Word Processing Workbook difficult to follow, while others commented on the length of the modules. Feedback from those who accessed the programme remotely was generally very positive, and they were delighted that they could complete it off campus and at their own convenience. Technical problems aside, most students did agree that the programme was worthwhile, and those students with few computer skills saw the programme as a valuable learning exercise.

Most of the feedback we received from the coordinators was about the lack of flexibility of the results, and the difficulty in tracking results for those students who had changed units etc.

Library staff felt the programme was very valuable, but were concerned at the time they spent attending to problems and queries. We were also aware that some of the quiz questions caused confusion, and that clearer, simpler instructions were needed on the front screens of the programme.

As a result of the problems and the feedback, we recommended that for the following year we:

• have more newer, faster computers within the library
• remove any Java Script as it appeared to cause many of the technical problems
• improve the registration procedure
• 'switch' the modules on over time to reduce the pressure on facilities
• reduce the length of a couple of the modules
• simplify the front screens
• include the Word Processing and Spreadsheet sample documents within unit study guides
• simplify the Word Processing Workbook
• improve the results format.

The LITE programme 1998 - 1999

The programme ran more smoothly over the next two years as a result of the modifications we made, and newer, faster equipment also reduced the pressure on our own facilities. We removed the Java Script which vastly improved the overall performance of the programme, and SQL server was subsequently used for the question database. We also revamped and updated the content from one year to the next, and in 1999 the programme was renamed as the Library and Information Technology Exercises (LITE). Feedback to the programme also vastly improved, but we still had technical issues which needed to be resolved. At the end of Semester 1 1999, we made a decision to move the programme across to the WebCT platform.

Moving to WebCT

WebCT is educational software that can be used for developing online courses, or for simply publishing materials online. Standard browsers such as Netscape or Internet Explorer can be used to access WebCT units, both on and off campus. Units are password protected, so students are assigned unique logins and passwords which they must use to access a unit.

We decided to move across to the WebCT platform for the following reasons.

• The University had invested in a WebCT site license, and so was strongly advocating development of online units using the WebCT software.
• The University's Teaching and Learning Centre (TLC) was centrally supporting and maintaining all WebCT units on a central server, and agreed to help us move LITE over to the WebCT environment.
• WebCT was already being used by some academics for developing online units, and appeared to be a more stable system than our own purpose built platform.
• WebCT could satisfy most of our existing requirements.
• WebCT units could be easily modified once they were implemented, and we could manage and modify the quizzes ourselves.

The one drawback was that the software would not be able to handle the student registration and tutor allocation procedure. This was critical because it formed the basis of producing the results. However as we really believed that WebCT would solve most of our other ongoing issues, we looked hard for a solution to this procedure. In the end, our IT staff decided that we could handle this as a separate entity on our own Web server. Of course, this meant that our IT staff had to support this part of the database, and again be responsible for producing the results!

There was also some concern expressed early on as to whether a single WebCT course could support 2000 students, so we agreed to the proposal that we set up separate versions for each of the Foundation Units, and one for Murdoch's Open Learning Australia (OLA) students and guest users.

Format and Development of WebCT LITE

During Semester 2 of 1999, development on the WebCT version began. As we were generally happy with the basic structure of the existing programme, we sought to maintain this where possible. After the registration and login pages, students would link to a LITE WebCT home page. From here they could access the tutorials page and the tutorials (previously known as modules). We really wanted to keep the quiz questions in-context, but as the WebCT quiz component is a separate entity, we had to develop separate quizzes linked at the end of each tutorial.

We employed a Murdoch computing student to help us develop the registration procedure. He created a web form page to take care of this and the tutor allocation procedure. The students would submit this form, login and then be linked to the LITE home page. Our student also developed a second script to store all of the registration details until we needed them at the time of producing the results. At that point, they would be retrieved and matched with the WebCT quiz results for each student.

In the mean time our team revamped the content, and met with TLC staff to find out more about how WebCT operated and what was possible. When our content was ready, they moved it across to the WebCT platform, and then cloned it to create a separate version for each of the units.

There was a definite learning curve involved for all of us in developing WebCT LITE. Even with assistance from the TLC, we spent a vast amount of time making the programme work the way we wanted it to, or as close as possible. The quizzes also proved problematic. When we tested the programme we encountered quiz error problems. WebCT did not like the quizzes being linked from within the tutorials, so in the end we had to make them accessible only from the LITE home page. Editing seven separate versions of the programme was also time consuming.

Implementation of WebCT LITE

We implemented the programme in Semester 1 2000 and it was generally smooth sailing, but we did encounter a few difficulties. Even with very clear printed, verbal and online instructions, some students found it a challenge to work out their logins and passwords! However there were genuine cases of students who were not matched in the database and again, sorting out these students was time intensive. Also, due to LITE, the server handling WebCT units crashed as it could not cope with the number of students accessing quizzes. The solution was to upgrade the server and as soon as this was done, most of the problems disappeared. Producing the results also required a lot of extra manipulation, and this turned out to be far more labour and time intensive than we had hoped for.

Feedback to WebCT LITE

Semester 1 2000 students were strongly encouraged to complete an online survey available from within the programme. The average percentage of students in each unit who completed the survey was 26.2 per cent. Students found LITE very easy to use and the percentages of students who completed it off campus was 54.2 per cent.

Feedback also showed that most students felt more confident in using the library, its catalogue and databases, and computers in general, after completing the programme. Only about half the students who completed the survey felt more confident in using the internet after completing LITE. This was not altogether surprising as many students now enter university with pre-existing internet skills.

The students were also asked to describe aspects of LITE they liked the most and least. A sample of responses from across the units is shown below.

What aspect of LITE did you like the most?

• The easy to use interface.
• The fact that it was an effective and easy way to learn how to use the library's resources and computers. Also, being able to access LITE from the internet makes it even more convenient.
• User friendly, can be accessed anywhere, anytime, easy to use, easy to submit.
• The interactivity of the learning procedures.
• Very exciting, challenging and cool!!!
• Good times, great on-line programme!

What aspect of LITE did you like the least?

• The time that was needed to complete it.
• Time consuming.
• Some of the tutorials are too wordy.
• Having to go through things I already knew, like information on the word processing and internet use.
• That it was compulsory and due by a certain date.
• The length of the tutorials.

The unit coordinators and tutors also commented that they had far fewer queries from students about the programme than ever before.

Where to Now?

The major change to the programme for 2001 is that students will be responsible for submitting their results to their tutors. WebCT has a feature which can be implemented to show each student's results in a tabulated form that can be printed. The unit coordinators have agreed to trial this proposal, and students will be required to submit this page to their tutor, twice during the semester, for recording. This will save us time and effort producing results, and we can completely remove the student registration procedure. Students will be able to start the programme much earlier, and will not need to spend time completing registration details. The success of this trial will be largely dependent on the tutors, as it will be up to them to ensure that their students complete the programme and submit their results. If at the end of the Semester 1 2001, we find that most students did not complete the programme, we will reinstate a simplified registration procedure for 2002.

With the feedback in mind, we are again in the process of reviewing, updating and modifying LITE for 2001. Additionally, for the first time, students will be asked to e-mail their completed word processing and spreadsheet documents to their tutors as attachments.

In the future, we hope to further increase the interactivity of LITE, and expand it so that more optional tutorials are available within the programme. We also hope that newer versions of the software will allow us to link the quizzes from within each tutorial. With the skills that staff have gained, it also opens up a vast opportunity to create other general and subject specific online library instructional packages.

Is it Worth it?

Should you go down the road of developing an online library literacy programme, with or without the IT component? Definitely. To begin with, you can tailor it to your own environment. It's also skill enhancing, rewarding, establishes further contact between academic staff and library staff, makes the library visible, and generally promotes the library and its staff immensely. Feedback also shows us that students really enjoy completing the programme and greatly value the skills it equips them with. Specifically they comment that an online programme is more stimulating, challenging and convenient, and an excellent way to reach external students. However be warned! Unless you have copious amounts of resources at your disposal and can contract outside expertise to create the perfect programme, it takes considerable time, effort, resources and dedication, to develop a quality online programme in-house. Also remember that building the programme is only half the battle. Maintaining it and supporting it are equally critical, and can turn out to be equally expensive in terms of time and staff involvement.

However, I'm convinced that the positives outweigh the negatives. LITE is now not only firmly embedded within the university's foundation units, but is also known more widely on campus. It is often recommended to students by academics outside of foundation units, and even from student to student. It is seen as supporting the development of online units on campus, and the university's endeavours to ensure its student population is both information and IT literate.

Finally, to WebCT or not to WebCT?

Like most of these programmes, WebCT has its good points and its bad points. So the answer to the question is yes, if your main priorities are to develop a generally stable programme that is relatively cost effective, and easily modified. The answer is no, if what you want to do is develop a wildly creative programme that is unique. WebCT units tend to all look the same. Ideally we would like the best of both worlds. To this end, we hope that as new versions of the software become available, they will allow a greater degree of creativity and flexibility, thereby providing our future students with an even more exciting and stimulating online learning environment.