Adapt or Adopt? The Process of Reusing Information Literacy Learning Objects

Poster Description: This poster will focus on the project planning and management process we went through for updating and developing information literacy tutorials. Using a collaborative, user-centered process we reimagined our most popular tutorials and developed a rubric for evaluating tutorials outside our environment for adoption or adaption.

Poster: View the presentation in Google Slides.

Presenter Name(s): Melissa Gomis, University of Nebraska – Lincoln

Presenter Bio(s): Melissa Gomis is the Teaching and Learning Librarian with a focus on coordinating, developing, and assessing accessible and inclusive online learning objects at the UNL Libraries. Melissa also collaborates with subject specialists on online learning projects and works on OER initiatives. She can be contacted at:

18 replies on “Adapt or Adopt? The Process of Reusing Information Literacy Learning Objects”

Hi Melissa,
I enjoyed reviewing your poster. I was curious about your definitions of tutorials, LOs, and modules. Is that language universally shared across the library? across the university? Does it matter in the grand scheme of things? Why was it important for your project?

Hi Torrie,

Thank you for viewing my poster. That’s a good question! The definitions are not universally shared across the library or university. Right now this conversation has just been in the teaching and learning department at the library. Determining definitions, particularly for tutorials was important when reviewing materials to adapt and adopt. As you know there are many different types of tutorials available. This helped us to have some shared language and develop some consistency in our expectations for the type of tutorial we are interested in providing to our learners – especially for just-in-time learning or for a flipped classroom format.

This is also the beginning of some bigger picture thinking related to our digital learning strategy and thinking about what instructional content we include on our website, in LibGuides, in Canvas Commons, etc. and the terminology we consistently use for labeling, descriptions etc.

Does that answer your question?

Great presentation. I’m going to suggest that others at my library look at this. Did you encounter librarian resistance to adapting others’ learning objects (‘not invented here’ attitude), or sunsetting library instruction content (‘you’re throwing away my stuff’)?

Thanks, Rhonda! Great question! At my current institution I haven’t encountered resistance to adapting others’ learning objects, but I have encountered that perspective in other positions. For us adapting makes the most sense b/c of the resources (time, software, skills, money) it takes to create learning objects – particularly videos. I think framing it that way is helpful. We have been able to edit adapted videos to add our own branding and to remove any institution specific content, and luckily there hasn’t been a lot to edit out. By using adapting existing materials this allows us to focus our time and energy on developing LO’s for institution specific content. It will also allow us to take adapted LO’s and package them with our own content for longer form tutorials in Canvas. In short, it will help us do more much faster.

Luckily, the person who created a lot of our older tutorials is no longer at the institution so that made it easier to sunset some of these materials. However, if that hadn’t been the case I think using the collaboratively developed rubric to evaluate what we have would have helped move that conversation along – particularly for tutorials that were based off the old ACRL Instruction Standards.

Hi Melissa,

Thanks for sharing your evaluation strategy (and comprehensive presentation!). Will share this with my colleagues (and eLearning team) as we refine our own approach.

I’m wondering, did you receive any feedback on abstracting ‘quality’ with a score (particularly from folks who have worked on the LOs in the past)?

Hi Cal,

Interesting question. No, I didn’t receive any feedback on that. My teaching and learning colleagues were encouraged to provide feedback and comments on the rubric and we discussed it at a department meeting, but that question never came up. The department all used the rubric to evaluate a few tutorials for each category. While everyone provided scores and notes we found that the scores alone weren’t necessarily the deciding factor b/c we were adapting most of the tutorials and could make changes and improvements in categories with lower scores (to a certain extent).

I’m interested in figuring out how to determine of the LO’s learning outcomes are the best fit for our environment and if the framing and examples are what we want. We have library-wide learning outcomes and that is helpful. An LO can score high, but still not be quite right. Do you have an approach to this?

Lots of good info shared in this presentation; thank you, Melissa! I am going to spend some time reviewing and digesting many of the links you shared. I appreciate your methodical approach to reviewing content. I have created many videos and tutorials for our library and I think your criteria may help me to evaluate the continued use of some of those resources as well as make decisions about how to replace, update, or retire them. Thank you for sharing!

Thank you for viewing my poster! I’m glad you found it helpful. Currently I am thinking about going through this process again in preparation for the fall.

Hey Melissa, I loved this presentation/poster! I think all of these are great strategies for creating sustainable, accessible, and flexible online tutorials. I will definitely be sharing it with colleagues. I have a couple of questions. In your assessment, are you doing any surveys to users or usability studies with patrons on top of your great rubric evaluation? Also, I see that you mentioned creating digital handouts alongside your tutorials. What kind of digital handouts did you or librarians create?

Hi Sam, thank you for reading through my poster! So far I haven’t done any user surveys or patron usability studies with our tutorials. In the next few months I am hoping to pilot user testing and feedback with some of our library student workers as a start. Developing a digital learning strategy is part of our current strategic plan and I imagine usability studies will be a part of that.

In terms of digital handouts I have created one on Brainstorming a Research Topic using the 5 W’s with the H5P documentation tool:

I have also created a few using Google docs and Forms for student research logs.

Brand new Instructional Design Librarian, here. Thank you so much; this was so helpful!

I am brand new as well and wanted to thank you for sharing your work here. I especially found your Excel spreadsheet helpful in creating a plan/organization. Also, your tutorial criteria was helpful as well. Thank you!

In your presentation you stated “Many libraries have developed learning objects/tutorials/modules for information literacy concepts that are creative commons (CC) licensed. Reuse content when possible.”
How did you go about finding content to reuse? And/or what methods did you find to be most effective in finding reusable materials?

Hi Ina,

I admit that collectively I have spent quite a bit of time collecting links of library tutorials and organizing them. Sometimes libraries share out new tutorials that have through ALA or ACRL listservs. The ACRL Primo database is also helpful to review periodically and Canvas Commons. People have gotten pretty good at identifying CC licensed materials, but if you aren’t sure people tend to be responsive to email. Sometimes I google a topic and put the word tutorial afterwards and limit to .edu sites – this strategy helps a lot. Once I had many bookmarks collected I organized them in categories for reviewing. The links I have collected are also shared with my department and colleagues have pulled something from the list if they needed a quick video or other activity to use with a class. I hope this helps!