Research Skills Development

South Africa, September 2016

A reflection

Libraries In the past

Higher Education = equipping students to read

increasingly complex books

2

User education

Information literacy

Information literacy

+

learning skills

Research skills

development

Research skills development

A ten year

journey

Context and backgroundMonash University Library’s educational objectives

- to embed research and learning skills within faculty curricula

Monash University Graduate Attributes

- leveraging research and learning skills within curricula“The development of students who are “critical and creative scholars who produce innovative

solutions to problems; apply research skills to a range of challenges and who communicate

perceptively and effectively.”

Research Skills Development (RSD) Framework (Willison &

O’Reagan, 2007), is a crucial element in achieving these attributes

Continuum of skills development

Lifelong learning

Employability skills

Graduate attributes

Transition Graduation

Citing &

referencingReading

skills

Recognising

information

need

Study skills

Discipline

discourse

Exam

preparation

Written

communication

Problem-

solving

Academic

English

Critical

thinking

Listening &

note-taking

Oral

communication &

presentation

Problem-

identification

Finding

information

Evaluating

information

Using

information

Academic

integrity /

plagiarism

Monash University Library

Key StrategiesTo strengthen:

Education

Research

Staff

development

and Facilities

6

Collaboratively Connected

7

RSD framework -

Educational strategic alignment:

Underpins Monash University

Library’s educational strategy

and Monash University’s

Education Strategic Plan 2011-

2015

The library leads the university

wide adoption and

implementation of the RSD

framework across disciplines and

coursework

8

9

Igniting the RSD Framework

Development of an RSD module for

the Campus

Growing number of RSD active

pockets across the university

Developing evaluation tools and

methods

Cross faculty collaboration

10

Communicating the potential of the RSD with senior faculty staff

and the Pro-Vice Chancellor Learning and Teaching

Breadth of Impact

Eight faculties

– Business and Economics

– Foundation

– IT

– Health Sciences

– Social sciences

– Higher. Cert. Education

Monash University Education Strategic

Plan 2011-2015

11

Objectives

Review the learning objectives and assessment for all units

Use the RSD Framework to improve task assessment

– Map major assessment tasks

– Develop and test new assessment rubrics

Ensure library sessions reflect and support the new assessment

rubrics

Using the RSD Framework to improve

task assessment

Examine existing course rubrics and examples of previous

marking/evaluation

Identify the skills embedded in the task

Map the skills to the facets of inquiry

Incorporate any unique skills requirements of the discipline

Determine a range of grading levels

Collaborate - amend rubric in response to feedback

14 March 2012

THE LITERATURE REVIEW

A. Ability to formulate own research questions

B. Use of search strategy

B. Depth and breadth of coverage of topic

B. Range of sources

C. Critical analysis of literature

C. Clarity, accuracy and precision

D. Identification of central issues and concepts

D. Headings and sections

E. Explanation of techniques to examine topic

E. Development of valid case or argument

F. Abstract

F. Introduction

F. Logical order and path

F. Conclusion

F. Illustrations and tables

F. Length

F. Clarity and succinctness

F. Style

F. Grammatical conventions

F. Statements supported by referencing

F. Appropriate referencing style and bibliography

Final marking sheet exampleOverall Grade (circled)

N P C D HD

Study overview:

(Students

organise and

critically

evaluate the information)

MARKS 0 2 4 5

Introduction of both reviews (Titles)

Not introduced Titles given but incomplete reference

Clear introduction, title, journal reference, authors

Clear introduction, title,

journal reference, author,

journal impact factor, authors background

Identification of main aims

and rationales of the 2 papers

The aims and rationale are not

identified, misstated and/or misunderstood

The aims and rationale are

identified but presented too vaguely

Most aspects of the main aims and rationale are identified

Both central aims and

rationale of the paper are

identified and clearly communicated

Identification of hypothesis of each paper

The hypotheses are not identified or are misunderstood

The hypotheses are identified but are presented too vaguely

Most aspects of the hypotheses are identified

Hypotheses identified and clearly communicated

Clear explanation of

methods and design used in both articles

Methods and design used are

not clearly stated and/or misunderstood

Description of methods and some

attempt at describing design and statistics applied is incomplete

Methods, design and statistical

analysis described but not always

explained fully or fully put in proper context

All major methodology,

design and statistical

analysis identified and

clearly explained in appropriate context

Clear explanation of results in both articles

Results are either

misrepresented or not explained

Results are mentioned with minimal explanation

Results are described accurately

but missed some points and/or lacked comparative analysis

Results are described

accurately, and succinctly

compared to each other

and explained in a broader context

Consider the validity of results

Validity and significance of

results are not adequately explained

Results are described but it is not

clear why they are valid or significant

Clear explanation of the validity

and significance of results with

some attempt to compare and contextualise them

Clear explanation of the

validity and significance of

results comparing both and

in the context of other literature

Consider the relevance of the discussion

Discussions of the 2 papers not mentioned

Discussions mentioned but

relevance to results not considered

Discussions clearly explained

with some attempt to critically analyse relevance

Discussions and their

relevance clearly analysed and stated

5

4

4

2

3

4

2

Marks

16

17

Linda Mbonambi

Monash South Africa