Comparing Two Approaches to Developing Interactive Tutorials

1
Comparing Two Approaches to Developing
Interactive Tutorials

• LOEX 2002
• Heather Cunningham, Margaret Cunningham,
• Rea Devakos, Trudi Bellardo Hahn
• May 10, 2002
• www.lib.umd.edu/UES/loex2002.html
• www.library.utoronto.ca/gerstein/loex/

2
Why an Interactive Tutorial?

• Seeking innovative approaches to teach
  information literacy to freshmen
• Appeal to Web generation
• Self-paced
• Anywhere, anytime access (24/7)
• Satisfy commuter students
• Limited staff teaching facilities

3
Setting the Stage

• Compare two approaches
• Building vs. adapting online tutorials
• Evaluating effectiveness for
• teaching information literacy skills
• to first yr students
• Players
• Libraries
• University of Maryland, College Park
• Gerstein Science Information Centre
• University of Toronto

4
Setting Audience

• U of Maryland
• Adapting TILT
• Course ENGL 101
• Fall, spring, summer
• 3, 300 students
• 180 summer students
• Lectures, Library Day
• 1 Program Director
• 65 graduate TAs
• Integrated Fall 2001

• U of Toronto
• Building from scratch
• Course BIO 150
• Sept-May (year long)
• 1500 students
• 300 summer students
• Lectures, labs
• 1 Course Coordinator
• 6-8 Faculty, 35 graduate TAs
• Integrate Fall 2002

5
University of MarylandCollege Park campus
McKeldin Library
6
Project PlanningUniversity of Maryland

• Background
• ENGL 101 3-linked papers on controversial
  topic
• Students reaction
• Surf the Web find a few articles
• Copy and paste
• Instructors expectations
• Choose a focused topic
• Do background reading
• Use effective search strategies
• Select reliable source viewpoints
• Cite!

7
Project PlanningUniversity of Maryland

• Library Day basic info. literacy instruction
• What is not adequately covered
• Big Picture of information sources
• Determining appropriate sources
• for a specific information need
• Library resources vs. Web sites
• LC call numbers URLs
• Evaluating reliability of sources
• Citing vs. Plagiarism

8
Project PlanningUniversity of Maryland

• Build from scratch
• Librarians in-house programmer
• Outsource campus Web designers
• Hire outside programmer
• OR
• Wait for TILT to become available via OSL
• then adapt it

9
Implementation Phase IUniversity of Maryland

• Apr July 01
• Terrapin I. L. T
• Initial group (Apr- May 01)
• Current group (Jun 01 )
• 2 librarians 1 programmer

• Summer 01 Online Survey
• 181 students surveyed
• Majority liked TILT but took too long to finish
  
• Quiz questions tricky
• Module 3 (Evaluation) was difficult

10
Implementation Phase IIUniversity of Maryland

• Aug Dec 01
• Applied changes based on feedback
• Technical glitches
• TILT be pre-requisite
• Fall 01 - Evaluation Form
• 1,123 forms returned
• 67 completed TILT 11 Partially 22 No
  
• 38 yes complemented each other
• 54 did not answer
• 8 too long to finish

11
Sample New Page Added
12
Sample Stylistic Change

13
Implementation Phase IIIUniversity of Maryland

• Jan Apr 02
• Analyzed TILT LD to ACRLs
• Info. Lit. Competency Standards
• Spring 01 - Pre Post Test
• What was learned from TILT? Library Day?
  Both?
• Tested 176 students
• Improvements made on
• Best resources to use
• Boolean
• Understanding LC Call

14
Sample Pre Post Test Questions

• Pre - Test
• Post - Test

15
University of TorontoGerstein Science
Information Centre
16
Project PlanningUniversity of Toronto

• Background
• Library Clue assignment
• Assigned incomplete journal citation
• Complete citation, locate article, copy first
  page
• Web page explains indexes catalogue

17
Library Clue
18
Project PlanningUniversity of Toronto

• Why Library Clue was not enough for BIO 150
• Bioethics assignment
• Develop position on controversial topic
• Lack of critical analysis inchoosing sources
• Over reliance on Web sites
• Need to evaluate information
• Need to cite resources used
• Link instruction to resources

19
ImplementationUniversity of Toronto
2 intertwined tools

• Optimal Information Foraging Tutorial
• Built using HTML, XML, Flash Animation, Java
  Applets
• Interactive online tutorial
• 3 independent modules
• Same look and feel as Self Study Exercises
• Incorporate, adapt TILTs quizzes, games, images

• My Biology Library
• Built using My Library software
• Web portal
• Selected annotated collections of
  site-licensed resources
• Desktop library for biological sciences
  community

20
ImplementationUniversity of Toronto

• Began May 2001
• Core working group
• 2 librarians
• project management
• content provision
• BIO 150 Course Coordinator
• vetted content
• Instructional Technology
• Courseware Development
• Fund (2001-02)
• 1 graduate assistant
• 2 Web designers
• 1 illustrator

21
My Biology Library

22
Optimal Information Foraging
23
OIF Tutorial Features

• Approximately 1 hour
• Engaging
• Limited info per-screen,
  no scrolling
• Interactivity
• Games
• Quizzes
• Common look, structure navigation as
• BIO 150s online Self Study Exercises

24
BIO 150 Self Study Exercises

25
Project Challenges

• Need hook, storyline
• Incorporate, modify interactive features
• from TILT
• Learn XML on the spot
• Time consuming
• Communication
• Subject background helpful

26
EvaluationUniversity of Toronto

• Will begin usability testing summer 2002
• Will gather feedback
• Focus groups
• Evaluation forms
• Interviews
• Integrate into BIO 150 course curriculum fall
  2002
• E-mail feedback

27
Summary

• Differences
• Adapting faster than building from scratch
• TILT is general, standalone tutorial
• OIF is intertwined with My Biology Library
• Similarities
• Longstanding relationships with faculty
• Immediately relevant to specific groups
• Integrated into course curriculum
• Short timelines used existing staff
• Does not completely replace live instruction
• May be used by other students

28
Lessons Learned

• Plan for heavy workload
• May need to learn new skills
• Build on existing tools
• content
• Testing feedback essential

29
more lessons learned

• Collaboration with faculty, integration with
  curriculum important
• Coordination of schedules difficult
• Need to clarify who does which tasks, agree about
  deadlines

30

• Library Clue
• www.cquest.utoronto.ca/zoo/BIO150y/labs/
• library.htm
• BIO 150 Self Study Exercises
• www.cquest.utoronto.ca/zoo/BIO150y/labs/
• online.htm
• My Biology Library
• eir.library.utoronto.ca/MyUTL/guides/index.cfm?
• guidebiology
• Optimal Information Foraging Tutorial (OIF)
• laplata.dyndns.org/bioone50y/library/index.htm

31

• University of Texas TILT
• lib.utsystem.edu
• UMs Terrapin Information Literacy Tutorial
• www.lib.umd.edu/UES/TILT
• UMs ENGL 101 Web Guide
• www.lib.umd.edu/UES/engl-101.html
• ACRLs Info. Lit. Competency Standards for
  Higher Education
• www.ala.org/acrl/ilstandardlo.html