investigating the efficacy of embedment-- experiments in information literacy integration

7/29/2019 Investigating the Efficacy of Embedment-- Experiments in Information Literacy Integration

1/12

Investigating the efficacy ofembedment: experiments in

information literacy integrationMeagan Bowler and Kori Street

Mount Royal College, Calgary, Canada

Abstract

Purpose This paper seeks to present the findings of a series of experiments in embedding alibrarian at a variety of levels into the undergraduate classroom. This study aimed to determinewhether different levels of librarian embedment correlated with improvement in undergraduatestudents information literacy (IL) skills.

Design/methodology/approach Students from five undergraduate History courses and twoundergraduate Womens Studies courses participated in the study. A librarian was embedded in eachof the courses, at a variety of levels across courses. All student assignments were graded using astandardized rubric. Students IL skills were assessed using the research component of the rubric,which measured their ability to locate, retrieve, evaluate, and incorporate sources into theirassignments. Students research and overall scores on their initial problem-based learning (PBL)assignments and written assignments were compared to their final assignment scores in order toassess improvement over the course of the term.

Findings There was significant improvement in students scores when a librarian wasconspicuously and obviously embedded in the academic classroom. Students scores showed littleimprovement when the librarian was embedded but not explicitly identified as a specialist ininformation literacy, and when the researchers attempted to embed information literacy seamlessly inthe classroom.

Research limitations/implications The research was conducted only in courses in theHumanities.

Practical implications This study suggests that students IL skills improve most when IL isidentified in the classroom as a specialized subject taught by a highly trained specialist. Themethodology used may be useful for others studying the impact of IL instruction.

Originality/value Although embedding has been studied and reported on in the literature in a varietyof contexts, the study of different levels of embedding, quantified using the same rubric is unique.

Keywords Information literacy, Problem based learning, Librarians, Students

Paper type Case study

IntroductionIn 2006, Gilman (2006), an academic librarian from Yale, asked Chronicle readers to

show their librarians some love. The article went on to present several compellingarguments about why academic librarians together with information literacy (IL)curriculum should be integrated into discipline specific academic curriculum.Nonetheless, a gulf remains. Despite a growing body of research suggesting thatone-off sessions are not the most effective way to integrate IL into the classroom, manyfaculty members are reluctant to give up time to anything more than a generalintroductory session because they are often unwilling to lose discipline content or giveup control in the classroom (Julien and Given, 2002/2003; Julien and Boon, 2002)[1].

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0090-7324.htm

RSR36,4

438

Received 11 June 2008Revised 31 July 2008Accepted 9 August 2008

Reference Services Review

Vol. 36 No. 4, 2008

pp. 438-449

q Emerald Group Publishing Limited

0090-7324

DOI 10.1108/00907320810920397

PDFCreate!5

Trial

www.nuance

.com


2/12

In such an environment, it can be difficult to effectively integrate IL intodiscipline-specific curriculum, particularly in a way that will address the concerns ofboth the faculty member and the academic librarian, as well as ensure student success.The search to find a practicable integrative strategy resulted in over two years of

experimentation in embedment in the classroom by a historian and a librarian. Thispaper presents those experiments and offers some initial analysis of the results andwhat they suggest about the nature of embedment as a strategy. It also providescompelling evidence that embedment can be a highly successful strategy for ILeducation.

Obstacles to embedmentIn his article, Show your librarian some love, Gilman (2006) suggests that facultycolleagues might just be pleasantly surprised by the experience of a librarian in theirclassroom. After citing the obstinance and irrationality of teaching faculty, Gilmansuggests, with respect, that faculty get over it. While Gilman makes some fair

suggestions regarding advocating for what he terms research instruction, he misses asalient point, and the biggest obstacle to effective integration faculty do not have toget over it. If we are to integrate IL effectively into the discipline-specific classroomwe must find ways to create a lasting bridge between what Badke (2005) described asthe two solitudes of the academic library and the academic classroom.

There is already a good deal of literature on the nature of the two solitudes andstrategies for bridging the gap that exists between them (Kotter, 1999; McGuinness,2006; Julien and Boon, 2002)[2]. It is not the focus of this paper to address those issues;however, we acknowledge that there are real cultural differences that makecollaborating difficult. At the same time, faculty members across North America areconcerned about the apparent rise of information illiteracy, as evidenced by theincreasing incidence of plagiarism (Manuel et al., 2005). We concur with Owusu-Ansah

(2004) that discipline-specific faculty and faculty librarians have converging interests,if different duties, and that librarians occupy a unique position and are well placed tocontribute to solving the IL dilemmas plaguing academe today. Given and Julien (2005)argue that the way forward is to recognize that faculty members and librarians aremasters of their own (separate, but related) spheres. The results of our experimentsconfirm these findings: when information literacy is embedded consciously andconspicuously, and emphasized as a specialized and specific component of the course,students performance improves in real terms.

The nature of embedmentDewey (2004) suggests that the process of embedding journalists into military unitsduring the Iraq war was the inspiration for the term as applied to the increased

collaborations between librarians and faculty. While some may quibble with thegenesis of the word, there is general agreement that when used in the IL context, theterm is referring to purposeful collaborations between librarians and teaching facultywhere the librarian is more fully integrated into a course, virtual or real, than iscustomarily the case with one-off IL integration (Shumaker and Tyler, 2007).

A wide range of embedment activities are currently being discussed in theliterature. At the most general level, embedment might refer to IL outcomes beingspecifically designed by the librarian and linked to an assignment and targeted at

Investigating theefficacy of

embedment

439

PDFCreate!5

Trial

www.nuance

.com


3/12

students need in that particular course (Owens, 2008). A further stage on the spectrumof embedment might include consulting on the development of an IL assignment thatcomprises part of the students final grade. The librarian may or may not beresponsible for grading that assignment. Auer and Krupar (2005) and Callison et al.

(2005) provide a useful discussion a number of strategies for collaboration in thisrespect. Other examples of embedment include the creation of proscribed modulesaimed at developing IL competencies and comprehension, which are incorporated intoan online or face-to-face environment. Examples of this type are described by Smithand Presser (2005); Matthew and Schroeder (2006); Lampert (2005); and Cochrane(2006). At the very deepest level of embedment, the librarian is present in the classroomas a co-instructor. In this case, the librarian may teach IL, as was the case at DanielWebster College (Hearn, 2005) and Wake Forest University (Sharpless Smith andSutton, 2008), or they may be team-teaching the discipline specific information as wellas IL, as described by Hearn (2005). Drawing on the rich research about embedmentand the experiences at our own institution we undertook a series of experiments inembedment.

Initial experience in embedment?Our first experiment in embedment, although we did not identify it as such, wasconducted in the winter term of 2006, and laid the groundwork for the experiments thatare the focus of this paper. The collaboration emerged out of recognition that bothresearchers wanted to test the assumptions we were making about the efficacy of IL inthe classroom setting. In HIST 3391 Film and history, we consciously andconspicuously embedded information literacy and an academic librarian into a historycourse. The librarian was involved in setting the assignments and the assessmentrubric in consultation with the faculty member. The librarian met with the class forthree IL sessions linked to course assignments, and conducted pre and post course

I-SKILLS Resumes (MacMillan, 2005). In this experiment, we were also utilizing aclassroom response system (clickers), problem-based learning (PBL)[3], and

just-in-time learning, in addition to the experiment in integration. The results, whichwere presented at LOEX-of-the-West in June 2006, demonstrated that students hadachieved considerable success in achieving IL outcomes.

As is evidenced in Figure 1, students research scores increased dramatically overthe course of the term, showing a 17.2 percent improvement on average from the initialwritten assignment to the final written assignment. The I-SKILLS Resumes alsoshowed considerable improvement in students own self-assessment of their IL skills.We did not, however, know why. The design of the experiment clearly raised somequestions; most specifically that it was unclear which of the elements was responsiblefor the students success. Was it PBL? Was it the classroom response system? Was it

the combination? Was it the embedding of the librarian? In order to try to ascertainwhat was working, we embarked on a new series of experiments. We decided tomaintain the general course design, the assessment rubric, delivery methods, andassignments, but we would experiment with the level of embedment of the librarian.

Experiment design[4]In addition to the growing literature on embedment, our study was informed by thedeveloping practices of colleagues in Mount Royals Library Instruction Program.

RSR36,4

440

PDFCreate!5

Trial

www.nuance

.com


4/12

Mount Royal instructional librarians are embedded to varying degrees in a great manycourses and programs across campus. From this foundation we developed a continuumof embedment that we applied to a series of courses offered through the Department ofHumanities between 2007 and 2008 (Table I).

In the first of the subsequent experiments, WMST 3341 Women in Canada, thelevel of embedment was fairly low. The IL instruction in this course was comprised of asingle session (90 minutes) with a librarian in a computer lab. The session was focusedon developing students IL competencies for a particular assignment. The research

requirements for this particular assignment were significant. Students had to find bothprimary and secondary sources, evaluate them for scholarly merit, engage in a groupassessment of the sources and use them to develop a subject history of a particularwoman. The librarian was consulted in the development of the assignment andprovided input. Although we did not discuss other assignments that would follow, wehoped that students would apply the skills they learned in the session to their laterassignments.

In our second experiment we raised the level of embedment slightly. In both HIST3363 Conflict and society in the twentieth century and HIST 3373 The First WorldWar, two 90-minute classes were given over to IL instruction that was primarilyfocused on the research necessary to solve a PBL problem. In both these coursesstudents had two PBL problems to solve. In addition, students had essays that were

linked to those PBL solutions. The librarian and the instructor collaborated on thedesign of the problem as well as the IL session. In both classes there was also a smallassignment, the results of which helped to frame the IL sessions. The IL instructionwas integrated with the students assignments in terms of timing and task.

In our third experiment we embedded one librarian into each of five PBL teams.Each team was made up of five to seven students and had six PBL problems to solveover the course of the term. Librarians joined the team for at least one 60-minute worksession during each of problems numbered three through six.

Figure 1.Students average

improvement in researchscores and overall scores

in HIST 3391 (2006)


embedment

441

PDFCreate!5

Trial

www.nuance

.com


5/12

Level ofembedment Descriptor

Course experimentconducted in

IL learning outcomes and librarianresponsibilities

1 Entry level WMST 3341 07 Librarian collaborates on assignment

developmentLibrarian not responsible for gradingSingle IL session linked to specificassignmentFocus on IL skill development andmeeting course IL outcome

2 Twin pack HIST 3363 07 and3373 07

Librarian collaborates on assignmentdevelopment for courseLibrarian not responsible for gradingTwo IL sessions directly linked toassignments in courseCourse has an IL assignment (facultymember grades) that informs ILsession developmentFocus is on progressively developingskills and understanding ofinformationFocus on IL skill development andmeeting course IL outcome

3 Immersion WMST 3305 07 Five librarians attached to studentproblem solving teamsLead librarian collaborates ondeveloping course problems/modulesResearch expectations progressivelymore advancedIndividual librarians meet with teamsto consult, focus on assisting developresearch strategies, problemdefinition, assessment of sources andcritical analysisFocus on IL skill development andmeeting course IL outcome

4 Co-teaching(librarianidentified as ILspecialist)

HIST 3391 07 Librarian fully co-teaching courseLibrarian and faculty memberresponsible for discipline-specificcourse design, lecture preparation,assessment design, grading, as well asdelivery, etc.Librarian responsible, in collaborationwith the instructor, for integrating andteaching IL through modeling inlectures, specific tutorials dedicated toIL, search strategy assignment, andother weekly activitiesFocus on IL skill development andmeeting course IL outcome

(continued)

Table I.Spectrum of embedment

RSR36,4

442

PDFCreate!5

Trial

www.nuance

.com


6/12

Our final two experiments, conducted in two sections of HIST 3391 Film and historyover two years, were full co-teaching. For these courses, the Department of Humanitieshired a librarian to team teach a discipline-specific course with a historian. Thelibrarian was responsible for half of the course. In addition to subject material, ILmaterial was also integrated into almost every class. Both instructors shared theresponsibility for IL education as well as the film history education. There was onedifference between the two classes: in the section offered in 2007, the librarian wasidentified as such and information literacy was embedded obviously andconspicuously throughout the term, in specialized sessions, lectures, and tutorialsdevoted specifically to IL skills and learning. In 2008, the librarian was not explicitlyidentified as a librarian, and information literacy skills and learning were not explicitly

identified but were embedded throughout the subject-specific lectures, in an effort tointegrate IL seamlessly with the course work.

ResultsAll student assignments were graded using a rubric that assigned marks for thesis,analysis, research, style, and citation. Students IL skills were assessed using theresearch component of the rubric, which measured their ability to locate, retrieve,evaluate, and incorporate sources into their assignments. Grading rubrics andassignment requirements were given to, and reviewed with, students well before thedue date. For each of the experiments, we measured students improvement onwritten assignments and on PBL assignments over the course of the term. Welooked at both overall assignment grades and scores on the research component of

the rubric.Our findings, summarized in Figure 2, suggest that generally as the level of

librarian embedment increased students performance on the research component ofthe rubric increased as well. We also found a correlation between the level ofimprovement in students research scores, and the extent to which IL was identified asspecialized knowledge. In the course where we attempted to seamlessly embed IL anddid not explicitly identify it as specialized knowledge (HIST 3391 (2008)), there wasvery little improvement in students research scores.

Level ofembedment Descriptor

Course experimentconducted in

IL learning outcomes and librarianresponsibilities

5 Co-teaching

(librarian notnecessarilyidentified as ILspecialist)

HIST 3391 08 Librarian fully co-teaching course

Librarian not necessarily identified asa librarianLibrarian and faculty memberresponsible for discipline-specificcourse design, lecture preparation,assessment design, grading, etc.Faculty member and librarian equallyresponsible for integrating andteaching IL activitiesFocus on IL skill development andmeeting course IL outcome Table I.


embedment

443

PDFCreate!5

Trial

www.nuance

.com


7/12

WMST 3341Given the fairly modest level of embedment in this course, we did not have highexpectations for improvement. The results, however, exceeded our expectations.Students research scores and their overall scores improved in the written assignmentsover the course of the year. While overall scores increased by 5.6 percent, theimprovement in research increased more dramatically, improving on average 12.9percent. Scores on the research component of the PBL assignments also improved byan average of 9 percent from the initial PBL, which students completed before the ILsession, to the final PBL at the end of term.

In this experiment, the IL session was tailored to meet the requirements for anassignment for which we have not measured students grades. These results

demonstrated that students were able to transfer IL competencies they learned for oneassignment to other different assignments. These results are encouraging in that theysuggest that a properly targeted IL session related to a specific assignment can benefitstudents in other course work.

HIST 3363/HIST3373The second of our experiments also yielded positive results. Students demonstratedimprovement on both their overall scores and research scores in both types ofassignments being measured. Research scores on written assignments increased, onaverage, 8.4 percent over the course of the term. Overall scores on written assignmentsincreased less significantly (3.7 percent). Research scores increased similarly in thePBL component of the course: on average, students research scores improved 10.6

percent from the first to the final PBL.While students research scores did not improve as dramatically as they did in

WMST 3341, it is important to note that the students research skills in the HISTclasses were much stronger than the WMST students initially. The average startingscore of the WMST students on the research component of the rubric for the firstwritten assignment was only 58.3 percent while the HIST students averaged 66.2percent, a difference of 7.9 percent. The difference in their base level scores most likelyaccounts for the smaller degree of improvement in scores.

Figure 2.Students averageimprovement in researchscores over the course ofthe term on writtenassignments and on PBLassignments

RSR36,4

444

PDFCreate!5

Trial

www.nuance

.com


8/12

WMST 3305Students in this class showed the most dramatic improvement in research scores of allthe experiments in embedment discussed in this paper. Research scores on PBLassignments averaged 63 percent in the initial assignment; by the final assignment the

average had risen to 84 percent, an increase of 21 percent over the course of the term.Overall scores increased by 11.4 percent.

Students showed less improvement in their written assignments (4.9 percent) thanthey had shown in their PBL assignments, although it must be noted that the firstwritten assignment was not due until quite late in the term when students had alreadybegun working with librarians in their PBL groups. Indeed, the average score for thefirst written assignment is significantly higher than those in other courses underdiscussion, suggesting that students were already benefiting from subject-specific andIL course instruction in their initial written assignment.

What is puzzling about this experiment is that the majority of students were neutralat best when asked whether having a librarian embedded in their PBL groups washelpful. When asked, in their exit survey, to indicate on a scale of one to five, one beingnot helpful and five being very helpful, how helpful they found having a librarianembedded in their team 14 of the 25 students (56 percent) indicated a score of three orbelow (see Figure 3).

Interestingly, despite the rather low scores for helpfulness, students felt their ILskills improved. When asked on the exit survey to self-assess their IL skills before andafter working with the librarian in the PBL teams students indicated they felt they hadimproved. Only 44 percent of the class rated their skills as good or excellent beforelibrarian embedment, but after embedment that number increased to 79 percent. Therewas significant improvement in IL as evidenced in the students assignment scores andin their own self-assessment of their information literacy skills (see Figure 4).

We are not sure what explains the seeming disconnect between students evaluation

of the helpfulness of the librarian embedment (low), their self assessment of theirinformation literacy skills (fairly high) and the improvement in research scores (alsoquite high). It may be that students self-assessment was affected by their grades if

Figure 3.Students perceptions of

the helpfulness of librarianembedment in PBL groups


embedment

445

PDFCreate!5

Trial

www.nuance

.com


9/12

they did well they may have been likely to comment positively. However, the exitsurvey was given after the final PBL but before students had received their grades.This will require further study.

The difficulty with this approach to embedment is the high resource cost. First of allthe time commitment for each librarian was very high. As well, the lead librarian wasresponsible for collaborating with the course instructor to design the assignments andcoordinate schedules. Although the results are dramatic in terms of students achievingthe IL outcome, it is not sustainable. It does, however, speak powerfully in support ofembedment strategies, and certainly supports our contention that students researchimproves when IL is identified as a specialized component of a course.

HIST 3391 (2007)In the section of HIST 3391 offered in 2007, students showed dramatic improvementwith respect to IL. While the improvement in overall grades was fairly small (4percent), improvement in research skills was quite high (18 percent). There was alsosignificant improvement in PBL grades, particularly with respect to research.Students research grades increased on average 12.5 percent from the first to the finalPBL assignment. Encouraged by these results, we decided to conduct the sameexperiment the following year, but attempt to integrate IL more seamlessly into theclassroom; that is, incorporate it in a less conspicuous or obvious way.

HIST 3391 (2008)Our final experiment yielded some surprises. Students showed little improvement in IL

in their written assignments with the average score increasing only 0.5 percent fromthe initial written assignment to the final written assignment. The lack of improvementin IL was also reflected students performance in PBL groups (1 percent improvement).

Why were we not seeing the improvement in research scores we had seen inprevious classes? We wondered if perhaps we had had an exceptionally strong cohortto start with, and therefore there would be a smaller window of potential improvement.However, average initial and final assignment scores, both overall and in research, didnot differ significantly from those of the other cohorts.

Figure 4.Students self-assessmentof their informationliteracy skills, before andafter working with alibrarian in PBL groups

RSR36,4

446

PDFCreate!5

Trial

www.nuance

.com


10/12

There may be a number of reasons for the lack of improvement. Our initialhypothesis is that the difference is caused by the way we embedded the librarian. Whatdistinguished this course from the other sections offered in 2006 and 2007 is that wemade IL and the librarian inconspicuous. Our efforts at seamless integration may have

effectively buried IL in the classroom. In addition, having the faculty memberparticipate in teaching IL, rather than having only a designated specialist teach it, mayhave had the inadvertent effect of confirming what students are already reported tothink about IL that they know it all and do not require special training or skills to dogood research. As Manuel (2002) and others have posited, students tend toover-estimate their abilities in regard to navigating the information world. Ourfindings certainly seem to confirm that IL cannot be, as some instructors would argue,developed intuitively by students or that it just happens in class (McGuinness, 2006).We assiduously modeled good IL, but we did not articulate it as specialized knowledge.These initial results suggest that it is important to identify IL as specialized andcomplicated knowledge and that an expert is required to teach it.

Overall assessment and conclusionIn reflecting on the results of our experiments we are convinced of the efficacy andvalue of pursuing embedment, although clearly all embedment is not equal. We wouldsuggest that all of the experiments, perhaps save for the final one, yielded sufficientlysignificant improvement that we would recommend using these strategies in moreclasses. Although the improvement in IL among students in WMST 3305 wasastounding in some ways, the resource cost is not sustainable. Unless resourcingapproaches are found to permit that kind of sustained, immersed embedment, wewould recommend that type with caution.

For some, there are questions about the efficacy or value of having librarians teachin academic classrooms (Kemp, 2006; Partello, 2005). Although the students in HIST

3391 (2008) might not have gained as much as their colleagues in other sections withrespect to IL competencies, there were other benefits. Student evaluation of instructionsurveys in both 2007 and 2008 indicated that students felt that the collaboration was apositive addition to the classroom. In addition, having a librarian team teach has theeffect of reaffirming the status of the librarian as faculty. The importance of this kindof recognition should not be underestimated given the current cultural issuesseparating our two solitudes.

Embedment can work; it can yield positive developments in IL among undergraduatestudents. But it is not without its difficulties. Among the obstacles in all these experimentis the issue of resourcing. We have been fortunate that the academic discipline has beenwilling to buy the time of the librarian. Too often, however, this is not the case.Embedment without adequate resourcing will not be sustainable and it can confirm what

professors already think that librarians are at the institution to provide a service,particularly in terms of research, and do not appropriately belong in their classrooms.IL education absolutely belongs in the academic classroom of the undergraduateinstitutions and specialists, librarians, belong in the classroom teaching it.

Finally, our results in the last experiment, HIST 3391 (2008), were surprising andwill require further study. Our efforts to seamlessly integrate IL and devolve some ofthe responsibility for teaching IL to the historian in the classroom seem to have had theopposite effect that we intended. The results suggest that IL needs to be integrated as


embedment

447

PDFCreate!5

Trial

www.nuance

.com


11/12

conspicuously as possible into the academic classroom. Information literacy should beidentified in the academic classroom on an equal footing to the discipline-specificknowledge presented in the classroom: each needs to be identified as specializedknowledge taught by specialized instructors.

Notes

1. In this paper the term faculty is used to denote faculty members teaching or working in anacademic or discipline-specific department, and librarian to denote faculty members orprofessionals working in an academic library department.

2. The authors acknowledge that they are fortunate with the environment that exists at MountRoyal. We were able to start our collaboration on a solid foundation; however, we recognizethat that is not the case at many institutions, particularly large research focused universities.Librarians are identified at Mount Royal as full faculty members. IL is concretely embeddedin all our programs as one of six college wide learning outcomes. As Dewey (2004) and otherssuggest, having IL as course, program and institutional outcomes creates a differentenvironment and one that makes collaborations more likely. Cultural differences and

obstacles aside, the results of this study clearly indicate that embedment works.

3. There are those who argue that PBL has become a catch basin of many different methods,including inquiry based learning and case studies. In its original form, as it was developed atMcMaster University Medical School some 30 years ago, PBL, is a way of constructing andteaching courses using problems as the stimulus and focus for student activity. It is notsimply the addition of PBL activities to otherwise discipline centered curricula, but a way ofconceiving of the curriculum, which is centered on key problems in professional practice.Problem-based courses start with problems rather than exposition of disciplinaryknowledge.

4. All of the courses that we experimented in (or on) were intermediate level courses (second orthird year) offered through the department of Humanities.

References

Auer, N.J. and Krupar, E.M. (2005), Librarians grading: giving As, Bs, Cs, Ds and Fs, TheReference Librarian, Vol. 43 Nos 89/90, pp. 39-61.

Badke, W.B. (2005), Cant get no respect: helping faculty to understand the educational power ofinformation literacy, The Reference Librarian, Vol. 43 Nos 89/90, pp. 63-80.

Callison, R., Budny, D. and Thomas, K. (2005), Library research project for first-yearengineering students: results from collaboration by teaching and library faculty, The

Reference Librarian, Vol. 43 Nos 89/90, pp. 93-106.

Cochrane, C. (2006), Embedding information literacy in an undergraduate management degree:lecturers and students perspectives, Education for Information, Vol. 24, pp. 97-123.

Dewey, B.I. (2004), The embedded librarian: strategic campus collaborations, Resource Sharing

& Information Networks, Vol. 17 Nos 1/2, pp. 5-17.

Gilman, T. (2006), Show your librarian some love, The Chronicle of Higher Education: ChronicleCareers, 3 October, available at: http://chronicle.com/jobs/news/2006/10/2006100301c.htm(accessed 4 April 2008).

Given, L.M. and Julien, H. (2005), Finding common ground: an analysis of librarians expressedattitudes towards faculty, The Reference Librarian, Vol. 43 Nos 89/90, pp. 25-38.

Hearn, M.R. (2005), Embedding a librarian in the classroom: an intensive information literacymodel, Reference Services Review, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 219-28.

RSR36,4

448

PDFCreate!5

Trial

www.nuance

.com


12/12

Julien, H. and Boon, S. (2002), From the front line: information literacy instruction in Canadianacademic libraries, Reference Services Review, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 143-9.

Julien, H. and Given, L. (2002), Faculty-librarian relationships in the information literacycontext: a content analysis of librarians expressed attitudes and experiences, The

Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 65-87.Kemp, J. (2006), Isnt being a librarian enough? Librarians as classroom teachers, College &

Undergraduate Libraries, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 3-23.

Kotter, W.R. (1999), Bridging the great divide: improving relations between librarians andclassroom faculty, The Journal of Academic Librarianship, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 294-303.

Lampert, L. (2005), Getting psyched about information literacy: a successful faculty-librariancollaboration for educational psychology and counseling, The Reference Librarian, Vol. 43Nos 89/90, pp. 5-23.

MacMillan, M. (2005), Open resume: magic words for assessment, College & Research LibrariesNews, Vol. 66 No. 7, pp. 516-20.

McGuinness, C. (2006), What faculty think exploring the barriers to information literacydevelopment in undergraduate education, The Journal of Academic Librarianship, Vol. 32No. 6, pp. 573-82.

Manuel, K. (2002), Teaching information literacy to Generation Y, The Journal of LibraryAdministration, Vol. 36, pp. 195-217.

Manuel, K., Beck, S. and Molloy, M. (2005), An ethnographic study in attitudes influencingfaculty collaboration in library instruction, The Reference Librarian, Vol. 42 Nos 89/90,pp. 145-6.

Matthew, V. and Schroeder, A. (2006), The embedded librarian program: faculty and librarianspartner to embed personalized library assistance into online courses, Educause Quarterly,Vol. 4, pp. 61-5.

Owens, R. (2008), Where the students are: the embedded librarian project at Daytona Beach,Florida Libraries, pp. 8-10.

Owusu-Ansah, E.K. (2004), Information literacy and higher education: placing the academiclibrary in the center of a comprehensive solution, The Journal of Academic Librarianship,Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 3-16.

Partello, P. (2005), Librarians in the classroom, The Reference Librarian, Vol. 43 Nos 89/90,pp. 107-20.

Sharpless Smith, S. and Sutton, L. (2008), Embedded librarians: on the road in the Deep South,College & Research Library News, Vol. 69 No. 2, pp. 71-85.

Shumaker, D. and Tyler, L.A. (2007), Embedded Library Services: an Initial Inquiry into Practicesfor their Development, Management, and Delivery, pp. 1-45, The Special LibrariesAssociation Annual Conference, 6 June 2007, Denver, CO, available at: www.sla.org/pdfs/sla2007/ShumakerEmbeddedLibSvcs.pdf (accessed 3 May 2008).

Smith, N.M. and Presser, P. (2005), Embed with the faculty: legal information skills online, The

Journal of Academic Librarianship, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 247-62.

Corresponding authorMeagan Bowler can be contacted at: [email protected]


embedment

449

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

PDFCreate!5

Trial

www.nuance

.com

investigating the efficacy of embedment-- experiments in information literacy integration

Documents