Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Using a peer to peer facilitation model to build information literacy skills: the NICE Evidence Search student champion scheme / Anglia Ruskin University partnership
Anne Weist, Education Manager, NICE Evidence ServicesJane Shelley, Subject Librarian, Anglia Ruskin University
1. Background - a little peer-to peer teaching theory
2. Main objectives of the scheme
3. MMU Evaluation of the scheme
4. The Anglia Ruskin University experience
5. On-going challenges
6. Questions
Aim: to share our learning with you
Peer to peer learning and teaching is long established (Boud 2001)
Peer learning is where “students learn with and from each other” (Falchikov, 2001)
One of the best ways to learn is to teach it (Webb and Powis, 2004)
Teaching deepens understanding (Biggs and Tang 2011)
Peer-to peer teaching theory
• Evidence base is relatively small for IL
“There have been few prior studies that have explored the value of using peer support or learning in the development of information literacy”
(Rowley, J. et al (MMU) 2015)
Peer-to peer teaching
Main objective of the NICE ES student champion scheme
• To increase the uptake and use of evidence based resources– Gives student champions:
• an insight into when and how to use Evidence Search
• The tools to develop, plan and deliver their own hands-on peer learning sessions http://www.nice.org.uk/Get-Involved/Student-Champions/NICE-Student-Champion-Scheme-resources
www.evidence.nhs.ukOver 300,000 selected resources from hundreds of sources
The scheme aids learners to develop skills in:• Use of high quality consolidated evidence based
resources• Organizing, planning and preparation• Reflection and evaluation• Giving feedback• Advocacy and promotion “link between being a
peer trainer and becoming an advocate” (Rowley et al 2015)
MMU Evaluation
Student Champions aid peer learning by their:
•Targeted and relevant subject knowledge•Awareness of specific study needs / assignment requirements•Being approachable and supportive •Ability to reduce anxiety for peers
(Taken from Rowley et al 2015)
MMU Evaluation
MMU Evaluation
“the Scheme is an interesting innovation that sits at the cusp of information literacy training and the promotion of evidence-based medicine. In particular, its dependence on peer delivery, and the scale of the Scheme, place it at the cutting edge.”
Rowley et al (2014) Evaluation of the NICE Evidence Search Student Champion Scheme final report, (unpublished) April 2014
1. Began May 2012 - observation
2. April 2013 workshop meeting other librarians
3. Joint workshops Nov 2013 & May 2014
4. Solo workshop – input from previous student champion – Nov 2014
5. Evaluation – ongoing and iterative
The Anglia Ruskin University experience
• Total student champions 31
• Numbers of student champions relatively low
• Cascade totals hard to track
• No protected teaching time
• Evaluation – bridging the gap and enabling and encouraging students to complete
The Anglia Ruskin University experience
• Reflection important
• Issues - IT, classrooms, timetabling, endorsement by academics
• Future – be flexible and creative
• Feedback – learn from what the student champions say
• Let the student champions speak – use benefits to them to sell it to others
ARU learning from the SCS
“introduce at the beginning of the course”
“fantastic tool”
“have more champions” as there are “hundreds of students”
“students ….have been using [tool] since the teaching session”
ARU Evaluation: student champions
Peer participant comments • This would have been fantastic if we had access
to it 2 years ago. This will be really useful for the remainder of my studies and also future career.
• The students who delivered the session explained everything very thoroughly. It was very well presented
• Thank you for this, it is really going to help me in the future…
ARU peer to peer headlines98% of students found the peer session useful or very useful
All felt more confident about searching and thought ES would be useful or very useful in their future careers
6-8 weeks after their sessions all respondents had either used ES or planned to do so
• Capacity• Support / dependence on individuals• Communication at all levels• Maintaining momentum • Data quality • Putting our learning into practice • Engaging with more HCPs and library staff• Relatively low evidence base
On-going challenges
• See also http://http://www.nice.org.uk/get-involved/student-champions
Questions
Andretta, S. Facilitating information literacy education (FILE). In: Handbook of Library Training Practice and Development, edited by A. Brine, 2008. Available at: http://www.academia.edu/315188/Facilitating_Information_Literacy_Education_FILE
Biggs, J. and Tang, C.S. Teaching for quality learning at university : what the student does. Maidenhead : McGraw-Hill/Society for Research into Higher Education/Open University Press 4th ed. 2011.
Boud, D., Cohen, R. and Sampson, J. Peer learning in higher education: learning from and with each other. London: Kogan Page 2001. Rowley, J. Sbaffi, L., Johnson, F., Weist, A. Evaluation of the NICE Evidence Search Student Champion Scheme, HLG Newsletter, Volume 31, Number 3, September 2014. Available at: http://www.cilip.org.uk/sites/default/files/documents/HLG%20Newsletter%20September%202014.pdf
References/ Bibliography
Rowley, J., Sbaffi, L., Johnson, F., Weist, A. Student peers' views on their involvement as trainers in peer-based information literacy training The Journal of Academic Librarianship. Volume 41, Issue 2, March 2015, Pages 201–206 Abstract available at:10.1016/j.acalib.2014.08.002
Rowley J, Sbaffi L, Johnson F, Evaluation of the NICE Evidence Search Student Champion Scheme final report, (unpublished) Information Interactions Research group, Manchester Metropolitan University, April 2014.
Webb, J. and Powis, C. Teaching information skills: theory and practice. London: Facet.2004.
References/ Bibliography
• What, if anything, that we have discussed has been of particular interest to you?
Post-it note evaluation
