STUDENTS AS INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGNERS: A PRACTICE-BASED EVALUATION OF A STUDENT-LED INTERNATIONAL SERVICE-LEARNING LIBRARY OUTREACH PROGRAMME
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35631/IJMOE.831076Keywords:
Discovery Systems, Information Literacy, Library Outreach, Malaysia, Peer-Led Instruction, Self-Efficacy, Service-LearningAbstract
In academic library outreach, satisfaction is often mistaken for evidence of learning. This study evaluates a one-day international service-learning programme in which undergraduate diploma students at a Malaysian branch campus designed, facilitated and delivered library instruction for twenty-eight visiting undergraduates from an Indonesian partner institution. It assesses both what participants reported learning and what they were observed doing during the instruction itself. A single-site case study combined documentary analysis of the programme archive with analysis of a questionnaire completed at the start of the programme and again at its close. Perceived information-search competence rose from M = 3.47 to M = 4.72 on a five-point scale, a within-participant gain of 1.26 points, 95% CI [0.99, 1.52], p < .001, and every participant whose score changed moved upward. Satisfaction was high (M = 4.70) but showed no association with the size of that gain (r = .08, p = .71), suggesting that satisfaction alone did not explain the reported improvement. Observation told a different story. During the single activity designed to exercise discovery-system searching, several groups bypassed the system and browsed the subject shelves directly, completing the task without practising the skill. This gap between reported confidence and observed behaviour, rather than the measured gain, is the study’s central finding. The design is single-group and pre-experimental, the outcome is self-reported, and no causal claim is made. The study contributes a replicable programme blueprint and a caution against reading self-reported competence as competence.
Downloads
References
Adewojo, A., & Adefila, E. (2025). Game-changing libraries: Enhancing information literacy through gamification. Business Information Review, 42(2), 106–111. https://doi.org/10.1177/02663821251328838
Adeyemi, I. O., Akanbi, M. L., & Issa, A. O. (2025). Influence of game literacy on gamified library services: A systematic review of literature. Alexandria: The Journal of National and International Library and Information Issues. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/09557490251335953
Association of College and Research Libraries. (2015). Framework for information literacy for higher education. American Library Association. https://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework
Baba, Z., & Abrizah, A. (2018). Transformation strategies in community engagement: Selected initiatives by Malaysian libraries. IFLA Journal, 44(2), 90–105. https://doi.org/10.1177/0340035218778435
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman.
Bringle, R. G., & Hatcher, J. A. (1995). A service-learning curriculum for faculty. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 2(1), 112–122.
Broussard, M. J. S. (2012). Digital games in academic libraries: A review of games and suggested best practices. Reference Services Review, 40(1), 75–89. https://doi.org/10.1108/00907321211203649
Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Rand McNally.
Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011). From game design elements to gamefulness: Defining “gamification.” In Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning future media environments (pp. 9–15). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2181037.2181040
Drennan, J., & Hyde, A. (2008). Controlling response shift bias: The use of the retrospective pre-test design in the evaluation of a master’s programme. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(6), 699–709. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930701773026
Durodolu, O. O., Ojo, J. O., & Ajayi, T. B. (2025). Examining the characteristics and perceptions of gamification strategies for enhancing library resource exploration among information science students and professionals. Library Management, 46(3/4), 286–300. https://doi.org/10.1108/LM-10-2024-0108
Eyler, J., & Giles, D. E., Jr. (1999). Where’s the learning in service-learning? Jossey-Bass.
Furco, A. (1996). Service-learning: A balanced approach to experiential education. In B. Taylor and Corporation for National Service (Eds.), Expanding boundaries: Serving and learning (pp. 2–6). Corporation for National Service.
Govindaraju, V. (2025). Bridging academia and society: Institutionalizing Service-Learning Malaysia (SULAM) within Malaysian higher education frameworks. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 9(8), 7461–7479. https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.908000619
Graewingholt, M., Cornforth, J., & Parramore, S. (2023). Better together: Experiential learning in peer-led research services. Reference Services Review, 51(2), 151–170. https://doi.org/10.1108/RSR-09-2022-0043
Hamzah, N. F. A., Tajuddin, A. J. A., Romly, R., Wahi, W., & Aris, S. R. S. (2023). From classroom to community: Understanding community-based learning practices in Malaysian higher education institutions. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 22(3), 33–50. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.22.3.3
Hanafiah, N. A. H. (2024). Integrating service learning in higher education for enhanced environmental consciousness in Yan, Kedah. Journal of Governance and Development, 20(2), 195–216. https://doi.org/10.32890/jgd2024.20.2.2
Howard, G. S. (1980). Response-shift bias: A problem in evaluating interventions with pre/post self-reports. Evaluation Review, 4(1), 93–106. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193841X8000400105
Howard, G. S., & Dailey, P. R. (1979). Response-shift bias: A source of contamination of self-report measures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64(2), 144–150. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.64.2.144
Jamhari, M. R., Nordin, M. S., Aripin, M. A., & Ismail, I. H. (2024). Implementation of service learning in Malaysian higher-educational institutions: A literature review. Journal of Workforce Education & Research, 1(1), Article a0000518. https://doi.org/10.36877/jwer.a0000518
Johnson, K. L., & Westbrooks, K. (2021). Quelling the boredom with alternative instruction: Augmented reality, escape kits, and scavenger hunts. International Journal on Social and Education Sciences, 3(1), 180–196. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijonses.65
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice-Hall.
Kuh, G. D. (2008). High-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them, and why they matter. Association of American Colleges and Universities.
Lowe, M. S., Stone, S. M., & Macy, K. (2023). Peer teachers taking the lead in classroom instruction: Program creation and challenges faced. Reference Services Review, 51(2), 171–189. https://doi.org/10.1108/RSR-09-2022-0041
Martin, L., & Martin, W. (2015). Modifying an information literacy game for outreach events. Reference Services Review, 43(4), 643–655. https://doi.org/10.1108/RSR-02-2015-0009
Mwiiyale, J. M., Hamutumwa, N. U., & Shatona, M. N. (2025). Exploring students’ views on information literacy skills training in higher education. The Reference Librarian, 66(1–2), 30–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/02763877.2025.2481088
Nicholson, S. (2015). A RECIPE for meaningful gamification. In T. Reiners & L. C. Wood (Eds.), Gamification in education and business (pp. 1–20). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10208-5_1
Norman, G. (2010). Likert scales, levels of measurement and the “laws” of statistics. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 15(5), 625–632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-010-9222-y
Osman, I., & Jahya, A. (2026). An educational approach to employability competencies through SULAM: Evaluating talent acquisition module for job searching skills among madrasah students. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 10(26), 2946–2960. https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2026.1026EDU0238
Sibthorp, J., Paisley, K., Gookin, J., & Ward, P. (2007). Addressing response-shift bias: Retrospective pretests in recreation research and evaluation. Journal of Leisure Research, 39(2), 295–315. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.2007.11950109
Smith, R. B., & Smith, N. N. (2020). Cross-border development: A long-term role for universities. ASEAN Journal of Community Engagement, 4(1), 235–258. https://doi.org/10.7454/ajce.v4i1.1077
Sung, H.-Y., Abdullah, N., & Ngo, H. T. (2023). Early literacy and family engagement: A cross-country analysis of caregivers’ perceptions of the public library’s role in the digital age in Taiwan, Malaysia, and Vietnam. Information Development, 39(3), 480–499. https://doi.org/10.1177/02666669221143746
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Wahi, R., Syed Aris, S. R., Mohamed, A. M. D., Zulkipli, Z. A., Awang Hashim, R., & Babiera, R. I. M. (2024). Exploring the nexus of service learning initiatives and quadruple helix stakeholders in Malaysia. Environment-Behaviour Proceedings Journal, 9(29), 21–27. https://doi.org/10.21834/e-bpj.v9i29.6018
Walsh, A. (2014). The potential for using gamification in academic libraries in order to increase student engagement and achievement. Nordic Journal of Information Literacy in Higher Education, 6(1), 39–51. https://doi.org/10.15845/noril.v6i1.214
Walsh, B., & Spence, M. (2018). Leveraging escape room popularity to provide first-year students with an introduction to engineering information. Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association. https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.v0i0.13054
Zhang, S., & Hasim, Z. (2023). Gamification in EFL/ESL instruction: A systematic review of empirical research. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 1030790. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1030790
