Information literacy skills of undergraduate medical radiation students

ava i lab le at www.sc iencedi rect .com

journa l homepage: www.e l sev ie r.com/locate/rad i

Radiography (2007) 13, 187e196

Information literacy skills of undergraduatemedical radiation students

Madeleine C. Shanahan*

Medical Radiations, School of Medical Sciences, RMIT University, PO Box 71, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia

Received 9 December 2005; accepted 30 January 2006Available online 23 March 2006

KEYWORDSInformation literacy;Information seeking;Undergraduateeducation;Lifelong learning;Independent learning;Online learning;Radiography;Medical imaging

Abstract Undergraduate education is undergoing a shift away from the traditional transmis-sion of a fixed body of knowledge to a learning approach where the emphasis is on supportinglearners to learn. Central to this change is recognition that undergraduate education pro-grammes should aim to develop independent learners who become effective lifelong learningpractitioners. Successful independent learning as an undergraduate student or as a lifelonglearner requires the learner to have well developed information literacy skills. An Online Elec-tronic Information Skills (OEIS) intervention was designed to develop the information literacyskills in a cohort of second year undergraduate radiography students. An evaluation focused onlearning outcomes was used to provide evidence of development of information literacy withinthe undergraduate course. The evaluation clearly demonstrated substantial skill developmentin students’ ability to access scholarly information in their discipline area. The reported con-tinued use of database searching by this cohort of students seven months after the OEIS inter-vention provides evidence that they are continuing to access and use scholarly information,information literacy skills necessary for their future work context.ª 2006 The College of Radiographers. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Introduction

The health care system is in a state of constant and rapidchange due to the increase in scientific knowledge and rapidtechnological advances.1e3 This underlies the call for a fun-damental shift in undergraduate medical radiation educa-tion away from the traditional transmission of a fixed bodyof knowledge to a learning approach where the emphasisis on supporting learners to learn.4,5 Central to this

* Tel.: C00 61 3 9925 7527.E-mail address: [email protected]

1078-8174/$ - see front matter ª 2006 The College of Radiographerdoi:10.1016/j.radi.2006.01.012

educational change is recognition that undergraduate pro-grammes should aim to develop independent learners whowill become effective lifelong learning practitioners. Inde-pendent learning can be supported by utilising a rangeof learning activities such as problem-based learning,case-based learning, research projects and reflection onpractice.4,6 Successful independent learning as an under-graduate student or as a lifelong learner requires the learnerto have well developed information literacy skills.3,6e14 In-formation literacy is commonly described as recognisingwhen information is needed and having the capacity to lo-cate, evaluate and use the needed information.8,9,15 Thereis an increased momentum for supporting information

s. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.elsevier.com/locate/radi

188 M.C. Shanahan

literacy skill development in undergraduate education dueto the widely recognised need to prepare students fora world that is in a state of constant change8,15,16 and theconcurrent increase in electronic dissemination of informa-tion.17e19

A literature search through the major databases whichindex journals in the discipline area of medical radiationand the more general discipline areas of health andinformation sciences (Science Direct, Cinahl, ExpandedAcademic ASAP, Pubmed, Proquest, Meditext) did notidentify any published research which examines informa-tion literacy skills of medical radiation students. Researchfrom discipline areas such as business, arts, nursing andrehabilitation therapy demonstrates that information liter-acy skills of undergraduate20e28 and postgraduate29,30 stu-dents are generally not well developed. This researchdemonstrates that undergraduate students tend to beheavily reliant on general internet searching with reportedlow levels of use of journal articles and databases.26,27 In-formation searches restricted to the internet limit studentaccess to scholarly information in the health disci-plines.7,31,32 In particular, research has shown that under-graduate students had difficulty identifying disciplinespecific search terms,21,22 identifying databases to obtaindiscipline specific information,21 and constructing searchstatements.21e23 These skills are fundamental for effectiveinformation searching.31,32 As medical radiation educatorsare encouraged to embrace independent learning ap-proaches with undergraduate students4,5 and low-levelinformation literacy skills impacts negatively on indepen-dent learning activities,3,6e14 it is both timely and impor-tant to investigate the information literacy skills ofmedical radiation students.

Background to developing an informationliteracy skill intervention

A survey was developed and administered in 2004 witha cohort of 2nd year undergraduate students enrolled in theBAppSc (Medical Radiations) at RMIT University. The stu-dents were specialising in the discipline area of radiogra-phy. There were 41 students enrolled and responses wereobtained from 37 students. The anonymous survey was usedto determine students’ information literacy skill levels withthe survey questions focused on areas the literature reviewidentified as being poorly developed in undergraduatestudents. The key findings of the survey are summarisedhere and discussed in greater detail under ‘Results anddiscussion’ as pre-intervention results.

Students were asked to identify the databases they hadsearched for university assignments. Ten students namedone database and three students indicated they havesearched two databases. In total, only 13 out of 37 studentsreported having searched databases for university assign-ments (Table 1, pre-intervention). This finding is in agree-ment with reported low level of use of databases byundergraduate biology students.27 At the time of this sur-vey, no beginning second year student reported havingused databases which index the key professional journalsin radiography. Searching for discipline specific informationin the field of radiography is a complex task. Using the

database configuration at RMIT University as an example,students need to search multiple databases to find articlesfrom Radiography (by searching for example Science Director Cinahl), The Radiographer (Meditext or Informit), andRadiologic Technology (Expanded Academic ASAP). Thereported low use of databases by students, in particulardiscipline specific databases, indicated there was a needfor information literacy skill development.

Students were asked to write a search statement thatwould function in a database for finding information on x-raying babies and children. This allowed the researcher toassess whether students were using appropriate discipline-specific search terms and also whether students couldconstruct an effective search statement. Only seven ofthe 37 responding students converted the layman term ofchildren to the medical terms paediatric(s) or pediatric(s)and no students used the term neonate.a Structured searchstatements using Boolean operators are required for effec-tive database searching.24 An effective search statementwas defined as one that has depth and breadth of search.22

The Boolean operator, OR, improves the depth of searchwhilst the Boolean operator, AND, improves the breadthof a search. At the start of their second year of studyonly two students demonstrated appropriate use of theBoolean operator, ‘AND’, and no student used the Booleanoperator, ‘OR’ (Table 2, pre-intervention).

The survey results of beginning second year students’experience with and skill levels of searching for informationwere in accord with the literature with the majority ofstudents not having searched a database and low skill levelsdemonstrated in identifying key search terms and construct-ing a search statement. The survey results clearly indicatedthere was a need to support skill development in this cohortof students as they undertook an independent learningproject. In previous years, students participated in a ‘‘twohour library skills’’ session which is a traditional method used

Table 1 Databases students report having used

Pre-intervention(n Z 37)a

Post-intervention(n Z 35)a

Science Direct 0 28Expanded Academic

ASAP0 3

Cinahl 0 2Medline/Pubmed 7 20Proquest 5 31PsycINFO 2 1Meditext 0 1Blackwell Synergy 0 1SpringerLink 0 1None 4 0No response 4 0Search engines or

internet12 1

a Students could identify more than one database.

a Pediatrics and neonates were the terms listed as related med-ical terms for children and infants in Medline using CSA Illumina.

Information literacy skills of undergraduate medical radiation students 189

to support the development of information literacy skills.31 Areview of the information sources cited in previous years’projects indicated that whilst students were active seekersof information, as a large number of information sourceswere cited, the quality of the sources was variable. Low qual-ity information primarily was associated with information re-trieved from the internet and included information that wasnot relevant; biased, where students used commercial ad-vertising information and had not recognised it as such; andinaccurate, where students used information from question-able internet sites and the information had not been checkedor corroborated. Overall the use of relevant journal articleswas low in number despite the ‘‘library skills session’’ beingfocussed on database searching. These anecdotal findingssuggested that the traditional one-off ‘‘library skills session’’was not sufficient to adequately support the development ofinformation literacy skills necessary for independent learn-ing activities. Consequently, a sustained information literacyintervention was designed and evaluated. It should be notedthat this research did not seek to compare the traditionalmethod used to support information literacy skill develop-ment of a single ‘‘library skills session’’ with the newly devel-oped sustained information literacy intervention.

Online Electronic Information Skills (OEIS)intervention

Embedding information literacy skill development is con-sidered best practice.15,33,34 Through this embedded ap-proach students develop their information literacy skillswhilst learning discipline knowledge. The OEIS interventionis a sustained intervention embedded within a group-basedproject. An online group-based approach was purposefullyused as the embedding model. This approach scaffolds stu-dents’ by utilising learners as rich resources within thegroup35; providing students with opportunities for commu-nication, collaboration and articulation36,37; and providingstudents with opportunities for reflection.38,39 This ap-proach provides students with opportunities for active en-gagement with the topic area, which supports knowledgeconstruction.36,40e42 The group-based approach recognisesthat members within the adult-learning group will haveaccumulated a range of experiences and knowledge there-fore group-based learning activities can utilise learners ascontent resource persons.35 The written nature of theposted messages allows the reader to read and ponderthe various points made in posted messages37 providinglearners with opportunities to compare their thoughts tothe thoughts of others, which promotes reflection.43 Reflec-tive activities support change in learner understandingsand actions.39,44

Table 2 Number of students including Boolean operatorsin their search statement

Pre-intervention(n Z 37)

Post-intervention(n Z 35)

Boolean operator ‘AND’ 2 20Boolean operator ‘OR’ 0 13

An example of an online learning activity is shown inFig. 1. The learning task for the evaluation of informationsources is outlined. Each member of the group posts an ini-tial response to the learning task and also responds to thepostings of their group. The use of asynchronous communi-cation adds transparency to the contributions made bygroup members throughout the project, which supportsgroup functioning. In addition, the evaluation of informa-tion sources learning activity encourages students tomake informed judgements about the information sourcesthey are using and this acts as a quality control measurefor their group project.

The OEIS intervention, as illustrated in Fig. 2, was de-signed and first used by the author in 2004. It consisted oftwo surveys, six online learning tasks where the academicmoderated the discussions and provided feedback to eachgroup, and a practical activity on searching databaseslead by the Faculty Liaison librarian. Survey 1 conductedat the start of the academic year, has been discussed andshowed there was a clear need for skill development withinthe cohort of students. Students had no previous experi-ence with group communication using Blackboard thereforeit was important to support students technically andsocially with the learning platform (Online task 1) prior tostudents engaging in the learning tasks.45,46 Following theintroduction to the online learning platform, learners en-gaged in the knowledge construction activities, Online tasks2e7 and the library-based database searching activity. Stu-dents engaged in activities supporting skill development inidentifying what information is needed as they focus theirproject, identifying key terms, constructing search state-ments; and searching databases. Searching databases wasfocused upon as the initial survey indicated that the major-ity of students had no experience using databases as an in-formation source. The annotated bibliography requiredstudents to identify their method of searching, evaluatethe information (which could be web-based; texts; journalarticles; policies) and indicate how this information sourceinformed their topic. Students presented their project totheir peers and the last online task aimed to preparethem for their oral presentation.

It is evident from Fig. 2 that the OEIS intervention seeksto engage students with recognising and determining theirinformation needs, locating, evaluating, synthesising andusing information. These abilities are common descriptorsof the information literate person8,9,15 and therefore theOEIS intervention may be described as having construct val-idity for information literacy development. Students’ infor-mation literacy skill levels of finding and evaluatinginformation are generally hidden to educators and so theOEIS intervention aims to support them and make themexplicit just as the synthesis and use of information by stu-dents is made explicit through, for example, their assign-ments, essays and projects. A second survey wasconducted to determine the information literacy skill levelof the students at the end of the group project.

Evaluation design

A primary objective of an evaluation is to ensure anintervention is working and is contributing to the success

190 M.C. Shanahan

Figure 1 An example of one of the online activities within the Online Electronic Information Skills (OEIS) intervention, whichoperate through the group page in Blackboard.

of the programme.47 The OEIS intervention was designed todevelop information literacy skills of the students and themajor focus for this evaluation was on student-learning out-comes. The research was conducted in a manner consistentwith requirements for approval by the Human ResearchEthics Committee.48

Measuring learning outcomes

An anonymous survey was administered to students enrolledin Radiologic Imaging 1, a full-year course in second yearof the BAppSc (Medical Radiations) programme, pre- andpost-OEIS intervention. There were 41 students enrolled

Survey 1 : IL skill level at beginning of 2nd year

Online task 1 : Getting used to online activities

Online task 2 : Develop focus for group project

Online task 3 : Key concepts and generating key words

Online task 4 : Constructing search statements

Library activity : Searching databases

Online task 5 : Evaluating information sources

Online task 6 : Annotated bibliography for key sources

Online task 7 : Preparing for an oral presentation

Survey 2 : IL skill level at end of 2nd year

Figure 2 Components within the Online Electronic Information Skills (OEIS) intervention.


and surveys were returned from 37 and 35 students forpre- and post-OEIS intervention surveys, respectively. Thestudent learning outcomes focussed on student skill level inlocating scholarly information in the discipline area ofradiography.

Results and discussion

Student learning outcomes were measured by the self-reported use of relevant databases (knowing where to findinformation) and ability to construct (knowing how to findinformation) and modify (knowing how to revise the search)the search statement.

Knowing where to find information

The successful independent learner knows where to lookfor information in their discipline area.8,9,15 The self-reported use of databases by students is recorded in Table 1for pre- and post intervention survey data. Table 1 indi-cates that at the post-intervention survey there is a largeincrease in the number of students who have used data-bases, with all responding students reporting having usedat least one database. There is also reported a substantialincrease in the range of databases they have used. Litera-ture relevant to radiography may be obtained froma wide range of databases. Discipline specific literature(radiography) is available through for example Meditext,Science Direct, Expanded Academic ASAP, and Cinahl. Bio-medical literature is available through for example Med-line, Pubmed and Proquest and psychology literatureavailable through for example PsycINFO and Proquest. Ithas been recommended that literature searching for radi-ography should occur across several databases to includeboth discipline specific as well as more generalised healthand medical journal articles.7 The increase in range of rel-evant databases that students report having used at thepost-intervention survey is a positive learning outcomeand provides evidence of the development of informationliteracy skills in these students.

Two students at the pre-intervention survey reportedusing more than one database when searching for theiruniversity assignments. Thirty-two out of 35 studentsreported using two or more databases for their universityassignments and 19 students reported using three or moredatabases for university assignments at the time of thepost-intervention survey. The increase in reported numberof databases used by students at the end of the groupproject is a positive learning outcome and supports bestpractice in literature searching.7,31,49

It is interesting to note, that at the pre-interventionsurvey one-third of students have nominated general searchengines as databases they had searched for their universityassignments. The misconception that internet searching isthe same as database searching indicates that for manystudents they would have been unlikely to access appro-priate scholarly information, such as journal articles, in thediscipline area of radiography.7 This change in student un-derstanding of the need to search databases to accessscholarly information in the discipline area of radiography

provides supporting evidence of information literacy skilldevelopment as students show a greater awareness ofwhere major information resources are available in theirdiscipline area.9

Knowing how to find information

The information literate person knows how to find in-formation to meet their information need. This can beevidenced by the ability to construct an effective searchstatement.15 It is evident from Table 2 that there is a sub-stantial increase in the number of students able to con-struct search statements which use Boolean operators atthe time of the post-intervention survey. No student atthe pre-intervention survey constructed a complex searchstatement using both ‘AND’ and ‘OR’, this increased to 13students’ at the post-intervention survey. This substantialincrease in the number of students able to use Boolean op-erators shows an increase in complexity of search state-ments being constructed by students and is evidence ofa positive developmental change in their information liter-acy skills. Whilst substantial skill development is demon-strated by the increase in appropriate usage of Booleanoperators, it is also apparent that there is a range of skillslevels within the cohort of students and further skill devel-opment in this area is needed. This finding is consistentwith research conducted by Salisbury and Ellis23 who con-tend that using Boolean operators is a complex task andso lower skill levels are expected for this task than for sim-pler tasks such as interpreting a citation.

Converting layman terms to the language of the disci-pline is required for successful database searching.24 At thepre-intervention survey 7 out of 37 students successfullyconverted the layman term of children to discipline specificterm of pediatric or paediatric. At the post-interventionsurvey this increased to 14 out of 35 students. Two commonerrors were noted with students either not using a medicalterm synonym or there was a spelling error in their searchterm. Failure to use medical synonyms was more commonat the pre-intervention survey with 23 out of 37 studentsnot attempting to convert laymen terms to an appropriatedisciplinary term compared to 10 out of 35 students atthe time of the post-intervention survey. These findingsare in accord with Debowski22 and Varga-Atkins and Ash-croft,21 who reported business students had difficulty se-lecting appropriate synonyms for a given search term.Spelling errors were a common reason for not successfullyconverting terms as students commonly misspelt the termspaediatric and pediatric, with errors including peadiatric,paediatrix, and pedeatric by seven students at thepre-intervention survey and by 11 students at the post-intervention survey. Whilst students did not perform actualinformation searches (as this was a survey question) and somay have self-corrected their spelling mistake, researchhas reported that spelling error is a common hindrance indatabase and internet searches.22,50

Knowing how to revise the search

The information literate person knows how to evaluate theinformation retrieved to assess whether a revised search

192 M.C. Shanahan

Table 3 Reported student self-identified strategies for narrowing a search



Post-interventionbased on groupproject experience(n Z 35)a

Limit years of publication 1 6 3Limit language of publication 1 3 0Search within a search 1 1 2Use more specific terms 8 15 12Increase the number of terms 3 6 11Combine concepts with ‘AND’ 8 19Use ‘NOT’ 0 1Limit type of information retrieved 5 1

a Students could identify more than one strategy.

strategy is necessary.15 Being able to modify a search state-ment requires students to critically think about the range ofoptions available to them when searching for informationand be able to both expand and narrow searches. Tables 3and 4 provide pre- and post-intervention responses. Thecolumns on the left and in the centre are responses toa knowledge question ‘‘how can you narrow (Table 3) andexpand (Table 4) a search’’, the column on the right listsmethods students reported using in their group project tonarrow (Table 3) or expand (Table 4) a search. It is clearlyevident from Tables 3 and 4, that students at the post-intervention stage have a greater range of strategies avail-able to them when they need to revise a search such aswhen the information retrieved is too great (Table 3) orwhen the information is insufficient (Table 4). In addition,the self-reported use of a large range of strategies (righthand column) indicates that students have used these skillsto make their searches for their group project moreeffective.

Students’ perception of their skill level

Students were asked to rate their level of agreement usinga four-point Likert scale (strongly agree, agree, disagreeand strongly disagree) with the statements ‘‘When findinginformation for university assignments/projects: I am ableto search databases effectively’’ and ‘‘When finding

information for university assignments/projects: I am ableto identify key search terms’’. The results are shown inTable 5. It is evident that students have a very positive per-ception of their skills levels in both searching databases andidentifying key search terms. Whilst students have a verypositive perception of their ability to search databases,the survey results show low skill levels in constructingstructured search statements for nearly all students atthe pre-intervention survey. At the post-intervention surveywhilst skill levels improved dramatically, a large number ofstudents were still unable to construct a search statementthat had both breadth and depth. Students also have a verypositive perception of their ability to identify key searchterms, yet the survey results show they had difficult inidentifying and spelling appropriate discipline synonymsfor specific terms. Overall there appears to be a mismatchbetween the perceived skill levels of students and the stu-dents assessed skill levels in identifying key search termsand searching databases. This finding is in agreementVarga-Atkins and Ashcroft21 who reported that the majorityof undergraduate business students overestimate their skilllevel in searching for discipline specific information.

The OEIS: transforming behaviour

Evaluation uses multiple sources of evidence, which allowsdata collection to move beyond pre- and post intervention

Table 4 Reported student self-identified strategies for expanding a search



Post-interventionbased on groupproject experience(n Z 35)a

Extend years of publication 1 0 4Use more general terms 8 13 9Use related terms 1 3 3Decrease the number of terms 1 7 2Combine synonyms with ‘OR’ 0 6 11Use truncations /wildcards 0 4 1

a Students could identify more than one strategy.


Table 5 Reported level of agreement by students of their ability to search databases and identify key terms pre- and post-intervention

Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree

Pre (%) Post (%) Pre (%) Post (%) Pre (%) Post (%) Pre (%) Post (%)

I can search databases effectively 0 20 68 77 11 3 0 0I can identify key search terms 19 26 70 74 11 0 0 0

survey data. Twenty students from the cohort of studentswho undertook the OEIS intervention in 2004 attended anoral presentation on the evaluation of the OEIS interventionin May, 2005. After the presentation students were asked toidentify what they considered to be outcomes for them forparticipating in the OEIS intervention. This open activitywas aimed at allowing students to consider both intendedlearning outcomes and unintended outcomes47 from theirinvolvement in the OEIS intervention. Twelve students(out of 18 responses) indicated that they had only searchedfor electronic information using search engines and werenot aware there were databases prior to the OEIS interven-tion. Comments by students included knew ‘‘nothingmuch’’ [student 4], ‘‘thought information searching wasjust typing words into search engines didn’t know about da-tabases’’[student 15], ‘‘only used plain Google searches’’[student 14], ‘‘little knowledge other than common searchengines’’ [student 11] and ‘‘ only the internet’’ [student 8].This high number of two-thirds of students reporting theyhad not searched a database prior to the OEIS interventionis consistent with the pre-intervention survey data whereonly 12 students (approximately one-third) named actualdatabases. This finding suggests that this subgroup is typicalof the class group and so their responses may be consideredto reasonably reflect the group.

The students who had not used databases prior to theOEIS intervention all reported that they were now searchingdatabases for information for their university assignmentsfor example ‘‘I still use Google but not dependent on it nowI use databases’’ [student 13], ‘‘group assignment [in whichOEIS intervention is embedded] really enhanced my un-derstanding of the databases’’ [student 11] and ‘‘I knowhow to use databases and e-journals to look for articles.This in turn helps me create a more academic assignment’’[student 10]. Documenting this dramatic shift in the type ofelectronic searching that students have undertaken afterthe OEIS intervention provides evidence which supports thesurvey data that information literacy skills have beendeveloped in these students.

Six students reported that they were aware of databasesprior to the OEIS intervention but had not been verysuccessful in ‘‘finding’’ the information they wanted. Thestudents reported that they have used their increased skilllevels in searching for information, developed through theOEIS intervention in the second year of the undergraduateprogramme, in their third year courses. Their commentsinclude ‘‘I became more confident using databases and usethem regularly for assignments. If full text articles were notavailable I am able to find them elsewhere’’ [student 1],‘‘aware of more relevant databases’’[student 4], ‘‘usinga greater range of databases . and how to construct search

statements’’ [student 3] and ‘‘now using AND and OR’’[student 17].

Seven months after the OEIS intervention all respondingstudents reported that they included database searching asa part of their search strategy and had improved skill levels.This dramatic transformation of electronic informationsearch practice by students suggests that the purposefullydesigned learning-centred OEIS fosters transfer of learning,a critical element in effective information literacy de-velopment.15,33,51 Five students recommended that infor-mation literacy skill development be extended throughouttheir undergraduate programme with comments including‘‘need to introduce in 1st year so students gain a betterunderstanding about how to search for information’’ [stu-dent 14], ‘‘more of this should be reinforced in 1st year’’[student 13] and ‘‘carry this through to third year’’ [student12]. Extension of purposefully designed learning activitiessuch as the OEIS intervention throughout an undergraduateprogramme would be in accord with best practice in devel-oping information literacy skills in higher education.15

It is evident from this evaluation that students havesubstantially improved and continued to utilise their in-formation literacy skills following the OEIS intervention.Active engagement with the topic area supports a deepapproach to learning and promotes knowledge constructionand transfer of learning.36,40e42 The substantial improve-ment in student information literacy skill levels followingthe intervention together with the students’ self-reportsthat as a direct result of the OEIS intervention there was pos-itive ongoing change to their information search practice isindicative that the OEIS intervention has actively engagedstudents in a deep-learning process and is a successful infor-mation literacy intervention. The intervention has beenshown to improve student knowledge and skills in areasthat research has identified as typically poor in undergradu-ate students, namely the level of database searching, knowl-edge and use of relevant databases, identifying appropriatedisciplinary search terms and the ability to construct a struc-tured search statement.21e23,26,27

Preparing students for graduate practice

To provide the best possible healthcare, health practitionersmust remain up-to-date with the changing knowledge baseof their profession.2 Governments in Australia and interna-tionally are supporting this process by providing healthcarepractitioners access to a number of major electronic infor-mation resources including databases, journals, text booksand guidelines.52e61 These major projects include for exam-ple NHS-net (internet access for the National Health System)

194 M.C. Shanahan

in the UK; National electronic Library for Health (NeLH) inthe UK; Hospital Authority Library Information Systems(HALIS) in Hong Kong; Clinical Information Access Program(CIAP), New South Wales State Government, Australia; Phy-sicians Health Channel, Victorian State Government, Aus-tralia; and Clinical Information Access Online (CIAO),Western Australian State Government. Recent research re-ports that health professionals have a low level of awarenessof electronic databases18,62 and a low level of databasesearch skills.18,29,62,63 These are learning outcomes thatthe OEIS intervention has been shown to support. By sup-porting the development of information literacy skills atthe undergraduate level, we are helping to prepare studentsto work effectively in the rapidly changing world they enteras graduate health professionals.1,2,4,5,8,10,14e16

Conclusion

This evaluation of the OEIS intervention, which was focusedon learning outcomes, has shown that students have sub-stantially improved and continued to utilise their informa-tion literacy skills. This illustrates the intervention hasbeen successful in positively transforming student informa-tion search practice and may be considered a successfulmodel for information literacy development. By supportingthe development of information literacy skills at theundergraduate level we are helping to prepare studentsto become independent learners, an outcome widelysupported in undergraduate education.1,2,4,5,9,11,14,16,64

Whilst this evaluation documents the development of infor-mation literacy at the course or subject level the samemethod could be adopted within programmes of study. In-deed, the survey results show there is range of skill levelsevident at the post-intervention survey which supportsthe need for sustained development of information literacyskills throughout the undergraduate programme.15 Devel-oping information literacy skills is helping to prepare stu-dents for a changing world. Health professionals areoperating in a climate of rapid technological and scientificchange and it becomes imperative that these practitionershave the skills to access and utilise current scholarly infor-mation.3,32,49 The continued reported use of databasesearching by students seven months after the OEIS inter-vention provides evidence that students are continuing toaccess and use scholarly information. This finding suggeststhat students are developing information literacy skills nec-essary for independent learning which is essential in theirfuture work context.1,2,4,5,8,10,14e16

Acknowledgements

The author wishes to express gratitude to the students whoagreed to participate in this research, and to Jenny Sim,PhD student in School of Medical Science, RMIT Universitywhose knowledge of online learning was helpful in de-signing the structure of the online learning tasks. This paperwas presented at the 2005 Evaluations and AssessmentConference, 30 November to 1 December 2005, Universityof Technology, Sydney, Australia, and the author wishes toexpress gratitude for the feedback received which was used

to refine the paper. Finally the author wishes to thank theanonymous reviewers of Radiography for their constructivefeedback on this paper.

References

1. Jarvis P. Lifelong education and its relevance to nursing. NurseEducation Today 1987;7:49e55.

2. Maslin-Prothero SE. A perspective on lifelong learning andits implications for nurses. Nurse Education Today 1997;17:431e6.

3. Wallace MC, Shorten A, Crookes PA, McGurk C, Brewer C. Inte-grating information literacies into an undergraduate nursingprogramme. Nurse Education Today 1999;19:136e41.

4. Sim J, Zadnik MG, Radloff A. University and workplace cul-tures: their impact on the development of lifelong learners.Radiography 2003;9:99e107.

5. McMahon T. Teaching medicine and allied disciplines in the21st century e lessons from Ireland on the continuing needfor reform. Radiography 2005;11:61e5.

6. Castle A. Assessment of the critical thinking skills of studentradiographers. Radiography 2006;12:88e95.

7. Brettle A, Gambling T. Needle in a haystack? Effective litera-ture searching for research. Radiography 2003;9:229e36.

8. Candy PC. Self-direction for lifelong learning. San Francisco:Jossey-Bass Publishers; 1991.

9. Candy PC, Crebert G, O’Leary J. Developing lifelong learnersthrough undergraduate education. Canberra: National Boardof Employment, Education and Training; 1994.

10. Cheek J, Doskatsch I. Information literacy: a resource fornurses as lifelong learners. Nurse Education Today 1998;18:243e50.

11. George R, Luke R. The critical place of information literacy inthe trend towards flexible delivery in higher education contexts.Australian Academic and Research Libraries 1996;27:204e12.

12. Gopee N. Lifelong learning in nursing: perceptions and reali-ties. Nurse Education Today 2001;21:607e15.

13. Hogg P. Advanced clinical practice for radiographers in GreatBritain: Professional roles, accountability and the educationalprovision. The Canadian Journal of Medical Radiation Technol-ogy 2004;35:6e12.

14. Kaplan Jacobs S, Rosenfeld P, Haber J. Information literacy asthe foundation for evidence-based practice in graduate nursingeducation: a curriculum-integrated approach. Journal of Pro-fessional Nursing 2003;19:320e8.

15. Bundy A. Australian and New Zealand information literacyframework: principles, standards and practice. 2nd ed. Ade-laide: Australian and New Zealand Institute for InformationLiteracy; 2004.

16. Johnston B, Webber S. Information literacy in higher educa-tion: a review and case study. Studies in Higher Education2003;28:335e52.

17. Carlile S, Sefton AJ. Healthcare and the information age: impli-cations for medical education. Medical Journal of Australia1998;168:340e3.

18. Griffiths P, Riddington L. Nurses’ use of computer databases toidentify evidence for practice: a cross-sectional questionnairesurvey in a UK hospital. Health Information and Libraries Jour-nal 2001;18:2e9.

19. Hunt F, Birks J. Best practices in information literacy. Librariesand the Academy 2004;4:27e39.

20. Wallace MC, Shorten A, Crookes PA. Teaching informationliteracy skills: an evaluation. Nurse Education Today 2000;20:485e9.

21. Varga-Atkins T, Ashcroft L. Information skills of undergraduatebusiness students e a comparison of UK and internationalstudents. Library Management 2004;25:39e55.


22. Debowski S. Wrong way: go back! An exploration of novicesearch behaviours while conducting information search. Elec-tronic Library 2001;19:371e82.

23. Salisbury F, Ellis J. Online and face-to-face: evaluatingmethods for teaching information literacy skills to undergrad-uate arts students. Library Review 2003;52:209e17.

24. Ellis J, Salisbury F. Information literacy milestones: buildingupon the prior knowledge of first-year students. The AustralianLibrary Journal 2004;53:383e96.

25. Larkin JE, Pines HA. Developing information literacy andresearch skills in introductory psychology: a case study. TheJournal of Academic Librarianship 2005;31:40e5.

26. Urquhart C, Thomas R, Spink S, Fenton R, Yeoman A,Lonsdale R, et al. Student use of electronic information ser-vices in further education. International Journal of Informa-tion Management 2005;25:347e62.

27. Callinan JE. Information-seeking behaviour of undergraduatebiology students: a comparative analysis of fist year and finalyear students in University College Dublin. Library Review2005;54:86e98.

28. Van Moorsel G. Library-sponsored instruction improves coreinformatics competences among allied health students: aresearch-based case study. Journal of Allied Health 2005;34:145e52.

29. Cole IJ, Kelsey A. Computer and information literacy in post-qualifying education. Nurse Education in Practice 2004;4:190e9.

30. Perrett V. Graduate information skills: the 2003 ANU skillsaudit. The Australian Library Journal 2004;54:161e71.

31. Brettle A. Information skills training: a systematic review ofthe literature. Health Information and Libraries Journal2003;20:3e9.

32. Brettle A, Grant MJ. Finding the evidence for practice: aworkbook for health professionals. Edinburgh: ChurchillLivingstone; 2004.

33. Bruce C. Information literacy: a framework for higher educa-tion. The Australian Library Journal 1995;44:158e70.

34. Nimon M. The role of academic libraries in the development ofthe information literate student: the interface between librar-ian, academic and other stakeholders. Australian Academic &Research Libraries 2001;32:43e52.

35. Knowles MS, Holton EF, Swanson RA. The adult learner. 5th ed.Houston, Texas: Gulf Publishing Company; 1998.

36. Duffy TM, Cunningham DJ. Constructivism: implications forthe design and delivery of instruction. In: Jonassen DH,editor. Handbook of research for educational communica-tions and technology. New York: Macmillan Library Refer-ence; 1996.

37. Laurillard D. Rethinking university education. 2nd ed. London:RoutledgeFalmer; 2002.

38. Brookfield S. A critical definition of adult education. In:Watson KE, editor. Facilitating learning in the workplace.Geelong, Vic: Deakin University Press; 1991.

39. Boud D. A facilitator’s view of adult learning. In: Boud D,editor. Appreciating adults learning: from the learners per-spective. London: Kogan Press; 1987.

40. Ramsden P. Learning to teach in higher education. London:Routledge; 1992.

41. Biggs J. Teaching for quality learning at university. Bucking-ham, England: Society for Research into Higher Education &Open University Press; 1999.

42. Prosser M, Trigwell K. Understanding learning and teaching.Buckingham, England: Society for Research into Higher Educa-tion & Open University Press; 1999.

43. Herrington J, Oliver R. An instructional design framework forauthentic learning environments. Educational TechnologyResearch and Development 2000;48:23e48.

44. Scown A. On-line supplementation of adult education: a changein pedagogy. In: Kell P, Shore S, Singh M, editors. Adult educa-tion @ 21st century. New York: Peter Lang; 2004.

45. Salmon G. E-tivities: the way to active online learning.London: Kogan Page Ltd; 2002.

46. McLoughlin C, Luca J. Lonely outpourings or reasoned dialogue?An analysis of text-based conferencing as a tool to support learn-ing, Responding to diversity 16th Annual Conference of theAustralasianSociety for Computers in Learning inTertiary Educa-tion. Brisbane: ASCILITE. available online, <http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/brisbane99/>; 5e8 December 1995.

47. Owen JM, Rogers PJ. Program evaluation: forms and ap-proaches. St Leonards, Australia: Allen & Unwxin; 1999.

48. RMIT Human Research Ethics Committee HREC. Project No25/04 Teaching and learning in information literacy with sec-ond year students enrolled in BAppSc (Medical Radiations),2004.

49. Snowball R. Finding the evidence: an information skillsapproach. In: Dawes M, Davies P, Gray A, Mant J, Seers K,Snowball R, editors. Evidence-based practice. Edinburgh:Elsevier; 2005.

50. Williams KA, Wong I. Searching for health information on theinternet: a pilot evaluation of pharmacists’ skills. Pharmacist2003;22:716e9.

51. Bruce CS, Candy PC. Developing information literate gradu-ates: prompts for good practice. In: Booker D, editor. Thelearning link: information literacy in practice. Adelaide:Auslib Press; 1995. p. 245e53.

52. Cheng G. The ‘market’ for medical and health informationin transition: the case of the Hong Kong Hospital Authoritylibraries. Health Libraries Review 1996;13:69e90.

53. Gosling AS, Westbrook JI. Clinicians‘ awareness and use ofonline resources: a survey of 5,511 clinicians’ use of theClinical Information Access Program (CIAP). Sydney, NSW:Centre for Health Informatics; 2002.

54. Gosling AS, Westbrook JI. The influence of professional andorganisational factors on health professionals’ use of onlineevidence. An evaluation of the Clinical Information AccessProgram (CIAP). Sydney, NSW: Centre for Health Informatics,University of New South Wales; 2002.

55. Scolaro T, Archer H. A one-stop shop for information for theWomen’s and Children’s Health Service, Conference papers:information online 11th exhibition and conference. Sydney:Information Specialist Group, Australian Library and Informa-tion Association; 2003.

56. Turner A, Fraser V, Muir Gray JA, Toth B. A first class knowledgeservice: developing the National electronic Library for Health.Health Information and Libraries Journal 2002;19:133e45.

57. Wilson P, Droogan J, Glanville J, Watt I, Hardman G. Access tothe evidence base from general practice: a survey of generalpractice staff in Northern and Yorkshire Region. Quality inHealth Care 2001;10:83e9.

58. Willmot M, Sullivan F. NHSnet in Scottish primary care: lessonsfor the future. British Medical Journal 2001;321:878e81.

59. Westbrook JI, Gosling S. Utilisation of the Clinical InformationAccess Program (CIAP) in NSW: A web log analysis. Sydney,NSW: Centre for Health Informatics, University of New SouthWales; 2001.

60. Liaw S, Pleteshner C, Deveny E, Guillemin M, Mulcahy D,Arnold M. Peer, paper or online clinical guidelines? The ques-tion is the answer. In: Waldruck K, Cesnick B,editors. Twelfth national health informatics conference.Brunswick East, Vic: Health Informatics Society of Australia;2004. p. 137e43.

61. Keppell M, Arnold M, Guillemin M, Deveny E, Liaw T, Pearce C,et al. A collaborative inter-disciplinary approach to the evalua-tion of the Clinicians Health Channel. Paper presented at the

http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/brisbane99/



196 M.C. Shanahan

Meeting at the Crossroads. Conference proceedings of the 18thAnnual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computersin Learning in Tertiary Education, Melbourne: 9e12 Dec 2001.

62. McClusky A. Occupational therapists report a low level ofknowledge, skill and involvement in evidence-based practice.Australian Occupational Therapy Journal 2003;50:3e12.

63. Gosling AS, Westbrook JI, Coiera EW. Variation in the use ofonline clinical evidence: a qualitative analysis. InternationalJournal of Medical Informatics 2003;69:1e16.

64. DEST Department of Education, Science and Training. Strivingfor quality: learning teaching and scholarship. Canberra,Australia: Commonwealth of Australia; 2002.

Documents

Information literacy skills of undergraduate medical radiation students