Reports & Papers

‘Assessment and Feedback with technology’ project 2014/15

Over the academic year 2014/15 LTI have led several projects  in order to try and improve assessment practices with technology at LSE.

The following are the outcomes of the work carried out as part of the assessment and feedback with technology project:


e-Assessment Practice at Russell Group Universities report Read e-Assessment Practice at Russell Group Universities report

A survey distributed to Russell Group universities to identify level of engagement with e-Assessment practice and factors conductive and critical to e-Assessment engagement.

Assessment and Feedback with technology at LSE report Read Assessment and Feedback with Technology at LSE report – please request a copy of the report.
Interviews with LSE Departments were carried out to identify the level of engagement with e-Assessment practice and understand the factors that encourage participation as well as barriers involved in this regard.


A series of pilots with various departments to explore pedagogical benefits of assessment and feedback with technology 

Government e-assessment Pilot study report Read GV100 e-Assessment pilot study
Government (GV100)
Timed, on-campus invigilated and typed formative exam, followed by online Self/Peer review and face-to-face Student-Teacher feedback
Technologies used: Exam4, Bring Your Own Device (BYOD), Moodle-TurnItIn (TII) PeerMark
Law e-assessment Pilot study report Read Law e-assessment pilot study
Law (LL205 & LL4K9)
Timed, take-home and typed formative mock exam
Technologies used: ExamSoft
LSE100 portfolio assessment Pilot study
Read LSE100 portfolio assessment pilot study
e-portfolio for summative assessment
Technologies used: Moodle assignment
Moodle- TII integration Pilots  

Read Moodle-TII integration pilots report
Moodle – TurnItIn integration

  • Statistics (ST327)
    Characteristics: Originality checking
    Technologies used: Moodle-TII integration
  • Philosophy (PH400 & PH201)
    Characteristics: Originality checking, TII GradeMark
    Technologies used: Moodle-TII integration, ipads
  • Media and Communications (MC425 & MC419)
    Characteristics: Originality checking, TII GradeMark
    Technologies used: Moodle-TII integration
  • Government (GV100)
    Characteristics: TII PeerMark
    Technologies used: Moodle-TII integration

DECISIONS MADE for Moodle-TII integration: Where the Moodle-TII integration worked, the feedback was largely positive.  In the instances where the integration did not fully work, the issues identified were significant and cannot be ignored.  In most cases, workarounds provided solutions; however as a result of the relative uncertainty associated with the functionality of the plug-in, LTI will not scale Moodle-TII integration but continue supporting the integration in the form of pilots.  As such, the plug-in will be made available upon request to those who want to use it (i.e. teachers will have an opportunity of requesting the plug-in from LTI for any given Moddle course(s)).

If you want to take part in Phase 2 of Moodle-TII integration (i.e. use the plug-in for your Moodle course(s)) please email us on

Visit our Moodle site for details of the Moodle-TII integratin phase 2, database of issues identifies and participating pilot users

LTI Grants

The following LTI Grant projects are related to e-Assessment. Find out more about the LTI Grants (e-Assessment innovation strand) and  LTI Grant winners or apply for an LTI Grant.

  • The social construction of human rights violations: e-Bricolage project,
    Pete Manning, Department of Sociology
    Use of peer assessment for an e-bricolage project, using resources produced for exam preparation and essay preparation.
  • From E-marking to E-feedback: training, applying and evaluation,
    Catherine Xiang & Lourdes Hernández-Martín, Language Centre
    Exploring new ways of marking and giving feedback (Moodle, iPads+annotation apps, Snagit).
  • Integrating offline marking and online moodle feedback using iPads,
    Ellen Helsper, Media & Communication
    Teachers using iPads and the Moodle-Turnitin integration to mark and give feedback on formative coursework (uploaded by students on Moodle).
  • Global perspectives via documentary and peer-assessment,
    Catherine Xiang, Language Centre
    Use of videos in continuous assessment with peer review of the documentaries created  – fully embedded in the continuous assessment.
  • Using film in urban planning analysis,
    Nancy Holman, Geography
    Creations of short interpretative films along with written work and presentation following fieldwork. The student produced films are formatively assessed by a panel of staff in the department. The films are part of the presentation students make at the end of the course.
  • Moodle-based group assessment for regression analysis using the R software,
    Sarah Geneletti, Statistics
    A project looking into replacing written report with a three part assessment: i)R Script ii) stats Moodle quiz iii)Moodle quiz report based on the analyses.
  • Electronic marking and feedback with iPads (Phase II)
    Lourdes Hernandez-Martin & Mercedes Coca, Language Centre
    Explore iPad apps to improve assessment and feedback


The following guidelines were produced to cover needs of innovative practic:

Testing and evaluation of technologies and tools

October 30th, 2015|Assessment, eAssessment Events, eAssessment News, innovation, LTI Grants, Reports & Papers, Teaching & Learning, Tools & Technologies|Comments Off on ‘Assessment and Feedback with technology’ project 2014/15|

Meet Dr Ellen Helsper, our upcoming NetworkEDGE chair

Ellen HelsperThe NetworkEDGE seminar on Wednesday 20 May will be a ‘Women in technology panel’ which will discuss ‘The role of education in encouraging women to work in technology’

Dr Ellen Helsper, from LSE will be chairing the panel so we caught up with her to find out why she is taking part in the discussion and her views on women in technology.

Can you tell us why you are chairing the ‘women in tech panel’ for networkEDGE?

When LTI asked me if I wanted to chair this panel I did not hesitate for a moment because I think the issue of why there is unequal participation of women in both the study of technology and career trajectories in IT is an extremely important one to consider. I have been simultaneously concerned and fascinated by the question of why, after several waves of feminism and women now making up a majority of the students in higher education, we are seeing a stagnation and even drop off in women taking up STEM subjects as students and in professional careers. I think it should be a societal concern that women are less likely to enter, are more likely to drop out and not return to careers like these and are much less likely to take up leadership roles in these fields than in others that have not historically been male dominated. Our everyday lives are increasingly being lived and shaped by IT and the lack of women in the design of these environments is extremely worrying. Not because I think that women are necessarily or inherently different than men but because I think it’s a great tragedy to lose the participation of such a large section of highly skilled individuals in our society with the wealth of knowledge and experience that could change our organisational cultures and output for the better. The reasons that push a lot of women out of this sector are also likely to influence many others to leave or not engage, others who might have a different way of doing things and a different, perhaps more inclusive approach to IT design and regulation. Looking at this is also important because it shows that there are still inherent inequalities and unconscious biases that steer the way in which resources and participation are distributed in our society and by being confronted with this we are forced to look at our own practices and beliefs and how they contribute to these patterns.


How does your own academic work link to the topic of the panel discussion; ‘The role of education in encouraging women to work in technology’

My work focusses on the links between social and digital exclusion. I research how existing patterns of inequality in offline resources such as economic, cultural and personal capital and individual well-being, are overcome, replicated or amplified with the digitisation of our society. An important aspect of this is the patterns of inequality in digital literacy and participation in a range of different online activities and environments. My research focusses on how the social and the digital context influences how comfortable people feel in engaging with ICTs. Thus, an important question for me to ask is how the design of platforms and content leads some people to feel more confident in engaging with digital and in digital environments. But also important is to ask how organisational and social structures influence how individuals see technologies and their own capabilities of and motivation to interact with and on digital platforms.

Sadly, most research to date shows that a replication and amplification of offline inequalities is likely in increasingly digital societies. For example, a recent report we published showed that women are less likely to be able to translate Internet use into tangible offline benefits because of disparities in digital skills levels between men and women (see This is partly to do with differences in confidence but is also likely to be caused by differences in the ways in which appropriate use of technologies are seen by men and women. My work looks at the causes, consequences and potential solutions for these patterns of linkage between social and digital exclusion.


What can formal educational institutions do to encourage more women to work in technology?

Of course one of the things that formal education can do is to encourage more women to study STEM and IT related subjects. Secondary and Higher education should incorporate training in digital skills as a matter of practice across all subjects. It is important that these are not just technical, coding skills but a range of skills that is needed to participate and work in increasingly digital environments (see

However, that will not be enough. Formal educational institutions need to collaborate with external stakeholders to create a society in which technologies are not seen as alien, where in fact they are related to everyday activities and seen as a common aspect of many different activities in our professional and personal lives: a society in which work in IT is not removed from all the other things that we do but one in a range of many options. One of the problems I see is the alienation or ‘technification’ of all things digital and technological. Instead of looking at the application and the usefulness of these technologies in everyday lives, careers in IT are often painted as an amazing world for geeks unrelated to the realities of what people do in their everyday lives. Instead of focussing on what we can do with technologies and how we can design technologies to make our everyday lives better many IT career campaigns focus on the technology and the world of inventors and entrepreneurs which are consistently imagined as white, middle class, middle aged men. A change in this vision of what IT is for and what an IT career can do, is not something that would only encourage women but also a range of other groups of individuals who feel excluded from that world. In addition, formal higher educational institutions can, in their research and teaching, try to change the work cultures in this field by influencing the ideas of people who will work in this field in the future and by making organisations aware of their existing practices and offering practical solutions for change.



Why do you think there is an unequal division of labour within the tech sector, with certain types of tech and management roles filled almost exclusively by men?

This is a hard question to answer, because there is something specific about the tech sector, where women are less likely to return to work after, for example, maternity leave even more so than in other STEM sectors.  Work cultures in IT are often described as gruelling, competitive, long, and socially isolated working lives without much mentoring or support for those who do not fit in neatly.  The Athena Factor report published in the Harvard business review ( shows that work culture is one of the main factors keeping women out of careers in STEM subject, more so than the fact that they are taking on a greater burden in care and household responsibilities and are still lower paid.  I would guess that this work culture is even stronger in the IT related careers and that there is a lack of awareness of what the real causes are of women feeling uncomfortable or unwilling to take up leadership roles within these environments.

The idea of meritocracy and choice in career progression in these industries is strong. The idea is that if you don’t make it to the top it’s because you were either not dedicated enough, did not have that bright idea or because you made a choice not to. I find the idea of choice particularly problematic, if it is really free choice why is it that certain groups of individuals in our society are much less likely to take up careers and proceed up the ladder in the tech sector than in other sectors? There must be more structural, cultural factors that explain this.


What can organisations that employ people in technology do to change the unequal gender participation in and division of labour in technology field?

This goes back to what I commented on before when discussing what formal education can do, there needs to be a change in work culture and a serious effort needs to be made to understand what really causes drop out amongst certain groups such as women. Quota’s and targets of getting more women into leadership positions are one part of it but this needs to be combined with a serious look at why these paths are not naturally taken or open to women and other groups. Quota’s help because people are more likely to hire and feel comfortable around people like them and are more likely to apply to positions and feel like they belong in environments that are not homogenous in a way that’s different from who they are. More transparent promotion and mentoring processes within companies are a fundamental part of this alongside reviews of working practice and clear action points to improve the culture.

Dr Ellen Helsper is Director of Graduate Studies and Associate Professor Media and Communications Department LSE
Email:  Twitter:@ellenhel

The NetworkEDGE women in tech panel discussion will take place on Wednesday 20 May at 3pm in R01.  LSE staff can book places via the online training system. Guests are also very welcome to attend and can book a place by emailing  For those that cannot attend the discussion will be recorded and livestreamed onto this blog.


Watch the recording of NetworkEDGE Professor Sonia Livingstone 25/02/15

Powerpoint slides from the presentation: Sonia Livingston @ NetworkEDGE – Slides

Tweet your questions and join the debate #lsenetEDGE



NetworkED 28.01.15 – Leslie Haddon on Children’s experience of phones

Many thanks to everyone who attended our event with Leslie Haddon. For those of you who missed it and want to rewatch it, we are providing a full recording below.

Q&A with Leslie Haddon

Dr Leslie Haddon Children’s experience of phones: for better or for worse.

To kick start the LTI NetworkED seminar series for 2015 Dr Leslie Haddon will be reporting on the findings from the Net Children Go Mobile project on children’s use of smartphones and tablets.  The seminar will take place on Wednesday 28 January 2015 at 3pm in R01.

NetworkED seminars are free to attend but places are limited so will need to be reserved via the staff training and development system or by emailing  All our talks are live streamed and recorded for those who can’t make it and a link to the live stream will be available on the blog shortly.

Ahead of his talk we asked Leslie some questions about the impact of mobile technology on children.

Q: Some argue that smartphones change our experience of the online world because the internet is now ‘always at hand’. Are children also finding this?

While mobile devices, especially tablets and smartphones, are clearly becoming more prevalent among children, that particular claim as well as the one that they can use the devices ‘anytime, anywhere’ is an overstatement, and definitely not so true of younger children. The findings from the Net Children Go Mobile project highlight the fact that children’s use of such devices, even more so than adults, is subject to many social constraints. As dependents there are often limits on how much children and young people can spend on smartphones, be that in terms of paying for downloaded apps or the running costs if their ISP package has limits. In addition, some parents worry about children having too much screen time, some feel that time using the smartphone takes time away from the family, or some simply feel that the smartphone is distracting children from their homework – which it sometimes does. So parents often ration the use of smartphones, for instance, only allowing it after homework has been completed, of ban the use of the device at certain times, for example, at dinner times or after bedtime.

Q: Did the location of access have a significant effect on children’s use of smartphones?

Yes, this was yet another constraint. In the UK many junior schools and for some years in secondary schools smartphones are banned. In this respect there is cultural variation with far less regulation of smartphones in Danish schools. In fact, in many schools Danish children can also use them in conjunction with the school Wi-Fi. Basically, it seems they are seen more negatively, as disruptive or anti-social, in British schools, having little educational merit and that is also a perception in some other countries. At least the Danish case shows that one does not automatically have to take that stance.   The other thing to add about location is that as very expensive items one of the key risks for parents and teachers is that the smartphone might be stolen. Hence there is pressure on children not to use these phones in certain public spaces, like when on the way home from school. Small wonder that the main location in which children use smartphone is actually in the home, also making use of the free Wi-Fi there, rather than when they are on the move.

Q: Did the Net Children Go Mobile project find that smartphones changed children’s behaviour in any way?

For better or for worse these devices have the power to enhance experiences. This can be true for the risks we discussed with them in interviews but interestingly one of the key areas commented on in some depth by children was in relation to communication. They noted how It was now far easier to communicate, some felt that it has enabled them to be more sociable with their peers, and there was now a greater sense of always having someone one could talk to because of the greater array of (often ‘free’) channels at their disposal. But the downside of this is in many respects the same as for adults – for many older children especially there is far more incoming communications, which many felt obliged to check, but which many also felt were irrelevant. Even the children sometimes admitted that this overload could be a distraction and it could also, in children’s eyes, be too much of a temptation. So even when they are generally positive about smartphones, as most children are, some ration themselves because of this – they put the phone aside at time or else decide not to engage in certain online options. And they sometimes acknowledge that, especially because it’s easy to respond quickly, there is the danger of sending messages that are interpreted in the wrong way. So while we may ask what is specific to and an issue for children, in many respects it is the more banal communication dilemmas, sometimes similar to those faced by adults, that attract their attention, that provoke comment, more than the risk agenda.


You can watch the recording of Dr Leslie Haddon on this blog and on our Youtube channel.

Trends in Educational Technology report

Over the past few months, CLT have been looking into some of the key technological trends set to influence the higher education sector in the next few years. We looked at the benefits they may provide to teaching and learning at LSE (and indeed, other institutions), and the considerations that need to be made before these technologies are implemented.

Using horizon scanning techniques to identify suitable reports, academic articles, media articles and blog posts by institutions and commentators working in the field, four key technological trends were identified through this method; Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), Bring Your Own Devices (BYOD), Gamification and Games-based learning and Learning Analytics.

A report on our research, Trends in Educational Technology, is now available on LSE Research Online. The report argues that these technologies can be beneficial, and should be embraced if they address institutional needs. However pedagogy must be at the heart of any technological adoption.

The summarized findings of this report are as follows:

March 4th, 2014|Reports & Papers, TEL Trends, Tools & Technologies|Comments Off on Trends in Educational Technology report|

Neurodiversity and Lecture Capture report is now available

The Neurodiversity and Lecture Capture report written by myself and Steve Bond is now available on LSE Research Online.

Neurodiversity is a term encompassing a range of conditions, including autism and Asperger’s syndrome, ADHD, dyslexia and dyspraxia (Dalton & Hall, 2013). Past studies suggested that recorded lectures could be a useful tool for neurodiverse students (Williams & Fardon, 2007). However, little is known about about whether lecture capture actually is useful to neurodiverse students, or how these students use it to study effectively while managing their condition.

Just before the end of the Summer Term, Steve Bond and I conducted a survey of neurodiverse students to measure the impact of lecture capture, and the (perceived) pedagogical benefits of the School’s Echo360 software. We sought to answer the following questions:

  • Do neurodiverse students access lecture recordings more or less often than neurotypical students?
  • To what extent to do students access recordings?
  • How useful were these recordings to the study strategies of neurodiverse students, and what challenges did they face when using lecture capture technology?
  • Did students record lectures themselves? If so, why?

138 students responded to the survey, of which 124 completed surveys were used in the study. 66% of students reported having a neurodiverse condition, the most common of which was dyslexia (33%). Neurotypical students, or students not reporting to have a neurodiverse condition formed 34% of the study population.

The key findings from this study were as follows:

Neurotypical and neurodiverse students access lecture recordings at similar rates.

Although previous studies suggest that neurodiverse students may benefit more from lecture recordings, neurodiverse students in this survey reported accessing lecture recordings at similar rates to neurotypical students.

Both neurodiverse and neurotypical students find lecture recordings “essential” for their studies.

49% of neurotypical students, and 46% of neurotypical students claimed that recorded lectures were “Essential” to their studies.

Neurodiverse students may not be accessing lecture recordings because they are unaware of their existence, or because they are not available in the first place.

The key reasons why neurodiverse students reported not accessing lecture recordings on Moodle were either lack of awareness that recorded lectures were available on Moodle, or that lectures had not been made available.

Neurodiverse students raised sporadic availability of lecture recordings as an issue.

Out of 81 suggestions on how the LSE could improve its provision of lecture recordings, issues with availability of lecture recordings were raised almost a third of the time (29%, 24 responses).

Neurodiverse students are more likely to use lecture recordings to reinforce concepts and revision, than to avoid attending lectures.

Neurodiverse students were over more likely to use recorded lectures to revisit sections to reinforce concepts and to make extra notes than neurotypical students, who were more likely to use recorded lectures to catch up on missed lectures. Only 4% of neurodiverse students and 7% of neurotypical students (16 respondents in total) reported using recorded lectures to avoid attending lectures.

Students identified audio and video quality as the biggest technical issue with lecture recordings.

Technical issues, including the video and sound quality of lecture recordings were mentioned 37 times out of 81 suggestions on how lecture recordings on Echo360 could be improved.

The majority of students do not record lectures themselves…

122 students completed this section of the survey in total, and the majority of students reported that they did not record lectures themselves (62%, 76 respondents).

…but if they do, its predominantly in audio format.

Audio recording was the most popular format for recording lectures, with 93% of all recordings made in audio format. Standalone recording devices, such as Dictaphones were mainly used for recording, with 32% of all recordings made on such devices.

Students suggested that access to lecture recordings on mobile devices and the ability to bookmark sections of recordings would be useful.

The functionality to add bookmarks to recordings on Echo360 does exist, and a recommendation could be to better inform students about the features of Echo360 to allow them to make optimal use of the service.

Conclusion and recommendations

Neurotypical students reported using lecture recordings more frequently, although the majority of neurodiverse students reported using recorded lectures in their studies. Neurodiverse students found lectures to be an “essential” tool for their studies and used lecture recordings to address issues in note-taking and content comprehension. However, inconsistencies in the availability, quality and accessibility of recordings are hindering neurodiverse students from fully exploiting this resource.

As a result of this survey, we recommend the following measures:

  • Support could be given to lecturers to help them adapt their lecture style to produce better lecture recordings.
  • Lecturers could be incentivized to provide lecture recordings, by including any training taken towards providing lecture recordings being included as part of personal development.
  • Academics could be provided with guides on how to use lecture recording equipment, and given tips and reminders to help improve the quality of recordings, such as remembering to switch on lecture recording equipment microphone in case lecturer before them switched it off.
  • Academic support staff should also ensure that lecture recording equipment is installed and in working condition, especially if there have been extensive technical problems with recordings from a particular room or course.
  • Students could be encouraged to produce their own lecture recordings in formats that suit their learning requirements, and provided support and guidance in being able to do so.
  • Further research should be conducted into more specific issues faced by neurodiverse students, and how technology is incorporated into their study strategies.

We believe that implementing these recommendations could improve the learning experience of students in general and improve the inclusivity credentials of the LSE.

We would also like to thank Linda Kelland from the LSE Disability and Wellbeing Office, and Sophie Newman, the former Students’ Union Disability Officer for their help and advice for this study.


Dalton, N. S., & Hall, W. (2013). Neurodiversity & HCI. In CHI 2013: Changing Perspectives (pp. 2295–2304). Paris, France.

Williams, J., & Fardon, M. (2007). Lecture recordings: extending access for students with disabilities. In Research paper for ALT-C: Beyond Control 2007, University of Nottingham. Nottingham.

November 21st, 2013|Reports & Papers, Teaching & Learning, Tools & Technologies|Comments Off on Neurodiversity and Lecture Capture report is now available|

Embedding Digital and Information Literacy in Undergraduate Teaching report

The latest piece of research by CLT on Embedding Digital and Information Literacy in Undergraduate Teaching compared strategies being used by three projects that are part of the JISC Developing Digital Literacies programme and the opportunities and threats for adopting some of these strategies as part of the work to embed the ANCIL framework into undergraduate teaching.

The report recommends a dual approach for Information Literacy and Digital Literacy skills to be successfully embedded into undergraduate teaching at the LSE. As explored in the CASCADE programme, student change agents provide contextualised, peer-to-peer support, but also important feedback on the kinds of issues faced by students, and the tools and technologies being used to overcome them and gain IL skills.

The ‘top down’ approach advocated by McGuinness (2007) is also needed to complement and support change agents. There needs to be increasing communication between academic faculty, academic support staff and librarians to better understand each others roles and remits, and find areas for effective collaboration.

We have already starting to explore some of the recommendations of this report, and have got the ball rolling through the ‘Student Ambassadors for Digital Literacy project’ (SADL), which will be looking at the role of student ambassadors to support digital literacies, and provide vital feedback to the project team on the embedded approach.

The report is now available via LSE Research Online.


McGuinness, C. (2007). Exploring Strategies for Integrated Information Literacy: From “ Academic Champions ” to Institution-Wide Change. Communications in Information Literacy, 1(1), 26–38. Retrieved from[]=Spring2007AR3&path[]=14. Accessed 26 July 2013.

July 26th, 2013|Reports & Papers, Research Skills, Teaching & Learning|Comments Off on Embedding Digital and Information Literacy in Undergraduate Teaching report|

Student Use of Recorded Lectures report

I’m really pleased to announce that CLT’s latest report on Student Use of Recorded Lectures is now available at

This report reviewed recent literature on the use of recorded lectures, and explores 4 issues on the subject:

  1. How do students use recorded lectures?
  2. When do students access recorded lectures?
  3. What effect do recorded lectures have on student attainment?
  4. What effect do recorded lectures have on student attendance?

The report concluded that students find lecture recordings to be a learning useful tool, and mainly use recorded lectures to make up for missed lectures and to prepare for assessments, which also explains student access patterns to recorded lectures. Having access to recorded lectures did not have any significant effect on student attainment for assessments, and although some students may choose to miss lectures due to the availability of recorded lectures, there seems to be little evidence that students actually believe that having access to recorded lectures is the main cause or incentive to miss lectures. In fact, the majority of students (55%) surveyed by Traphagan et al. (2009) strongly agreed that they preferred receiving lecture content in class, even when it is available through other means.

There is also scope for further research into how specific groups of students with high rates of access utilise recorded lectures, such as students with neurodiverse conditions and students from a non-English Speaking Background (NESB). Steve Bond and I have already got the ball rolling on that front, and are conducting a survey of students with neurodiverse conditions at the LSE, the results of which we hope to share online by the end of August, or early September.


Traphagan, T., Kucsera, J. V & Kishi, K., 2009. Impact of class lecture webcasting on attendance and learning. Educational Technology Research & Development, 58(1), pp.19–37. Available at: [Accessed March 11, 2013].

June 25th, 2013|Images, Audio & Video, Reports & Papers, Teaching & Learning|Comments Off on Student Use of Recorded Lectures report|

Form an orderly queue for your copyright queries

I just wanted to report that I am now back at LSE, in my role as Copyright and Digital Literacy Advisor in the Centre for Learning Technology. My new job title more accurately reflects the support I offer to staff at LSE, so please do get in touch if you have any queries!

I spent last term at Wolfson College, Cambridge, where I was an Arcadia Fellow carrying out research into the skills and needs of undergraduate students over the next five years in relation to information literacy. The main output of my research was designing what is being called the New Curriculum for Information Literacy. The Executive Summary actually says as much about the way such a curriculum should be implemented, as the content that should be included. However, working with my project associate, Dr Emma Coonan, the Research Skills and Development Librarian at Cambridge University Library, we hope to have designed a revolutionary curriculum for the future. We interviewed a wide range of experts as part of our research and have drawn up a curriculum divided into 10 strands. It should be of particular interest to anyone teaching undergraduate students, in particular the LSE100 team. The outputs and reports from the project are on our wiki and I will shortly be depositing them into LSE Research Online.

If you’d like to know more about my research, or if you have any copyright or digital literacy queries, please do get in touch with me.

July 28th, 2011|Announcements, Reports & Papers, Research Skills|Comments Off on Form an orderly queue for your copyright queries|