Search

Objective: This scoping review investigates how knowledge and skills are assessed in the information literacy (IL) instruction for students in physical therapy, occupational therapy, or speech-language pathology, regardless of whether the instruction was given by a librarian. The objectives were to discover what assessment measures were used, determine whether these assessment methods were tested for reliability and validity, and provide librarians with guidance on assessment methods to use in their instruction in evidence-based practice contexts.Methods: A scoping review methodology was used. A systematic search strategy was run in Ovid MEDLINE and adapted for CINAHL; EMBASE; Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) (EBSCO); Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA); Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts (LISTA); and Proquest Theses and Dissertations from 1990 to January 16, 2017. Forty articles were included for data extraction.Results: Three major themes emerged: types of measures used, type and context of librarian involvement, and skills and outcomes described. Thirty-four measures of attitude and thirty-seven measures of performance were identified. Course products were the most commonly used type of performance measure. Librarians were involved in almost half the studies, most frequently as instructor, but also as author or assessor. Information literacy skills such as question formulation and database searching were described in studies that did not involve a librarian.Conclusion: Librarians involved in instructional assessment can use rubrics such as the Valid Assessment of Learning in Undergraduate Education (VALUE) when grading assignments to improve the measurement of knowledge and skills in course-integrated IL instruction. The adapted Fresno test could be modified to better suit the real-life application of IL knowledge and skills.

Low health literacy is associated with poor health outcomes. Research is needed to understand the mechanisms and pathways of its effects. Computer-based assessment tools may improve efficiency and cost-effectiveness of health literacy research. The objective of this preliminary study was to assess if administration of the Short Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults (STOFHLA) through a computer-based medium was comparable to the paper-based test in terms of accuracy and time to completion. A randomized, crossover design was used to compare computer versus paper format of the STOFHLA at a Midwestern family medicine residency program. Eighty participants were initially randomized to either computer ( n = 42) or paper ( n = 38) format of the STOFHLA. After a 30-day washout period, participants returned to complete the other version of the STOFHLA. Data analysis revealed no significant difference between paper- and computer-based surveys ( p = .9401; N = 57). The majority of participants showed “adequate” health literacy via paper- and computer-based surveys (100% and 97% of participants, respectively). Electronic administration of STOFHLA results were equivalent to the paper administration results for evaluation of adult health literacy. Future investigations should focus on expanded populations in multiple health care settings and validation of other health literacy screening tools in a clinical setting.