|
1
|
- Alison Ricker
- Science Librarian
|
|
2
|
- Sporadic library instruction for specific course-related assignment
- Initiated by faculty
- No coordination within the major or between librarian/faculty
- Faculty desired a more structured approach, consolidating haphazard BI
sessions into one coherent course
|
|
3
|
- Developed in 1993 as a 14-week, full-semester course
- Initial planning: weekly meetings of faculty and librarian during late
summer to develop syllabus, exercises, readings, assignments
- Goal: research and honors
students develop IL strategies before advanced research
- Course content evolved rapidly as
resources changed
|
|
4
|
- Revamped in 2003 on Pass/No Pass basis, still 1 credit
- Strongly recommended for all majors
- Prerequisites: Organic Chemistry + one other core chemistry course
- Both instructors present at all class sessions
- Meets one evening per week for 1.5 hours
|
|
5
|
- Detailed instruction on general and interdisciplinary databases
- Separate session devoted to evaluating information (popular vs.
scholarly, bias in research, discussion of peer-review process,
determining validity of Web sites, etc.)
- General introduction to Web search engines
- Separate session on chemistry data found on the Web
|
|
6
|
- Students research a topic in teams of two
- Investigate a compound on their own
- General investigation methods stressed as well as resource-specific
skills
- Database comparison and evaluation
- Topics for investigation selected from list developed by all chemistry
faculty
- Chemical compound “from cradle to grave”
|
|
7
|
- From essential print and general resources to highly specialized
- Class sessions: review, presentation, demonstration, hands-on practice
- Weekly problem sets reinforce class session
- Penultimate assignment: oral presentation with handouts
|
|
8
|
- Complimentary knowledge and skills enriches course content
- Shared responsibility for teaching and evaluation reduces relative work
load
- Check and balance relationship helps refine assignments
- Better support during hands-on practice in classroom
|
|
9
|
- Two procrastinators = stress, poor planning!
- Misunderstandings based on incomplete or faulty communication
- Different assumptions regarding course goals, appropriate assignments,
work load, etc.
- Inherent difficulties between individuals of different status/rank
|
|
10
|
- Written work
- Weekly problem sets reviewed by both instructors
- Problem sets provide more detailed exercises and practice than can be
accommodated in class
- Emphasize process rather than the right answer
|
|
11
|
- Oral presentation and handout
- Both members of the team participate fully in the presentation
- Most student create PowerPoint presentations, but it is not required
- All class members and instructors hear all presentations
- Students could benefit from more practice and advice beforehand
|
|
12
|
- Want to focus on current research rather than pre-selected topics
- Homework each week takes too long
- Can’t always login to remote databases to complete homework
- “I knew some of this already, but also learned a lot”
- “I’m a better researcher because of this course”
|
|
13
|
- Quick recognition of the value and necessity of peer-reviewed literature
- Appreciation for comprehensiveness of SciFinder Scholar (and ease of
use)
- Little patience for anything perceived as busy work
- Reluctance to vary search strategy in different databases, or to expand
list of relevant keywords and subject headings
|
|
14
|
- Alison Ricker
- Science Librarian
- Oberlin College Science Center
- 119 Woodland Avenue
- Oberlin OH 44074-1097
- Phone: 440.775.5146
- Email: alison.ricker@oberlin.edu
|