ridls criteria a collective approach to describing, reviewing and assessing il training...
TRANSCRIPT
RIDLs criteriaa collective approach to describing, reviewing and
assessing IL training interventions in higher education
Stéphane GoldsteinResearch Information Network
Moira BentNewcastle University
Geoff WaltonStaffordshire University / Northumbria University
i³ Conference – Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen26 June 2013
1
What is RIDLs?
A coalition of partners working together to promote the value of information and research data literacy for academic researchers
A collectively-run programme to enable activities which help to advance LIS knowledge and skills
Grant-funded by HEFCE for one year initially (June 2012 – May 2013)
Important premise: Partners not limited to the academic library world: others players
have a stake! Important to build a network that provides that capitalises on
different outlooks Academic librarians, data management specialists, career &
professional development experts, information sciences researchers… 2
Who is involved in RIDLs?
Funded by: Managed by:3
RIDLs programme
Providing networking opportunities for partners
Criteria for describing, reviewing & assessing training interventions
Identifying & promoting cases of good practice in IL training interventions
Promoting RDF inasmuch as this applies to IL Thematic workshops
Research project on training & skills in open data
International engagement Contribution to FP7 bid on training in open access
4
Describing, reviewing and assessing practice in IL training interventions (courses and other resources). Two broad aims:
Helping those who design and deliver training interventions to describe and review them in a structured and consistent manner, allowing for easy comparison between courses/resources
Providing a simple means of assessing training interventions, particularly with regards their suitability and usefulness as transferable resources
Criteria take the form of structured questions set out in logical sequence
How the criteria have been used in practice to date: RILADS
DaMSSI-ABC project (research data management)
Relationship with Jorum
Rationale for the criteria
5
Part 1 of the criteria
Describing and reviewing training interventionsImportance of ensuring consistent approachThree sets of questions:
Who are the interventions designed for, and why? What knowledge, skills and competencies are they intended to
provide? How are the interventions delivered?
Are these the right sort of questions?
6
Part 2 of the criteria
What are the benefits that the training interventions bring aboutQuantitative data stemming from interventionsFeedback from learnersOutputs, outcomes, impactProblems encounteredNot easy to derive such information – outcomes and impact require longer-term viewsAre these the right sort of questions?Assessment or evaluation?
7
Questions to address
Two broad questions:How useful and applicable are the criteria?What is their value as a benchmark?
We wish to get a critical view from round table participants about:Whether the criteria represent a genuinely useful resource that can be disseminated and promoted as a recognised and trustworthy toolAny modifications required to reflect the needs and concerns of communities represented at i³
8
How useful and applicable are the criteria?
Reflect on how criteria might relate to participants’ own experiences and institutional circumstances
How might criteria be used in practice? Do they have value beyond HE? Is anything missing? Is anything wrong?
9
What is the value of the criteria as a benchmark?
Could their use be generalised across institutions as a consistent means of describing, reviewing and assessing training interventions?
How might they be disseminated and endorsed? Or is this just a waste of time?
10
References
RIDLs criteria: http://www.researchinfonet.org/infolit/ridls/strand2/
RILADs project: http://rilads.wordpress.com/ DaMSSI-ABC project: http://damssiabc.jiscinvolve.org/wp/ Jorum: http://www.jorum.ac.uk/
11
Thank you for taking part!
Stéphane [email protected]
Moira [email protected]
Geoff Walton [email protected]
12