By Dominic Agyei Dankwah

“… some of the most important dimensions of information literacy, like curiosity, critical thinking, ethical information use, and lifelong learning, are not always easily captured through conventional assessment instruments.”

One of the most thought-provoking sessions during my participation in the 2026 Mortenson Center Associates Program at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign focused on the assessment of information literacy (IL) instruction. As a librarian from the University of Health and Allied Sciences (UHAS) in Ghana, I arrived at the session expecting to learn about assessment tools and frameworks. I left with a much broader appreciation of assessment as a strategic process that can shape teaching, demonstrate impact, and strengthen the role of libraries within higher education. Like many academic libraries, UHAS has invested considerable effort in information literacy instruction. Through our credit-bearing Information Literacy course and various user education activities, librarians regularly teach students how to identify, evaluate, and use information effectively. However, while teaching has become an established part of our practice, systematic assessment of learning outcomes has received far less attention. In many cases, we assume that students have learned because they attended a session or completed an assignment. The need for assessment is even more evident in contexts where the value of information literacy instruction is not universally accepted. At UHAS, there have been instances where faculty members have questioned whether the course warrants the level of attention it receives and, consequently, have been reluctant to actively encourage student participation. Similarly, concerns have occasionally been expressed by university management about the considerable time, energy, and resources librarians devote to preparing and teaching the course. These perspectives underscore the importance of assessment. Without evidence of impact, information literacy instruction can easily be perceived as an ancillary activity rather than a core contributor to student learning. Robust assessment data can help shift this narrative by demonstrating the tangible outcomes and institutional value of library-led instruction. The Illinois experience challenged that assumption.

The session began with a simple but powerful question: What comes to mind when you hear the word assessment? For many librarians, assessment is often associated with grading, reporting, or accountability. The facilitators encouraged us to think differently. Assessment, they argued, is fundamentally about understanding learning. It is not merely about measuring what students know but about determining whether our teaching is achieving its intended outcomes and how it can be improved. This shift in perspective resonated strongly with me. At UHAS, our discussions about information literacy frequently focus on content delivery, what should be taught, how much time is available, and which resources should be introduced. We spend less time asking what evidence would demonstrate that students have actually acquired the intended competencies. The Illinois model places learning outcomes at the centre of instructional planning and assessment. Rather than beginning with activities, librarians begin by identifying what students should know or be able to do and then determining how that learning can be measured.

Another valuable lesson was the emphasis on aligning assessment with stakeholder interests. During the workshop activities, participants were asked to identify who would be interested in assessment results and why. The answers extended far beyond librarians. Faculty members may want evidence that students are developing critical research skills. University administrators may be interested in how information literacy contributes to student success and institutional goals. Students themselves may benefit from understanding their strengths and areas for improvement. This perspective highlighted an important gap in our own context. Information literacy assessment is often viewed as an internal library matter. Yet assessment data can serve as a powerful advocacy tool, demonstrating the value of library instruction to the wider university community. In an era where libraries are increasingly required to demonstrate impact, evidence of student learning can be far more persuasive than statistics on attendance or resource usage alone.

At the same time, my experience also prompted critical reflection on the transferability of the Illinois approach to institutions operating in different contexts. The University of Illinois benefits from significant staffing, technological infrastructure, and institutional support for assessment activities. Many African universities, including UHAS, operate under different realities. Librarians frequently manage multiple responsibilities, and formal assessment initiatives may compete with other pressing priorities.

Consequently, adopting the Illinois model in its entirety may not be practical or even necessary. What may be more realistic is a phased approach that focuses on manageable assessment activities embedded within existing instructional programmes. Simple measures such as pre- and post-session surveys, reflective exercises, rubric-based evaluation of assignments, or periodic reviews of student performance can provide meaningful insights without creating excessive administrative burdens. Another observation concerns the nature of information literacy itself. Assessment frameworks often emphasise measurable outcomes, but some of the most important dimensions of information literacy, like curiosity, critical thinking, ethical information use, and lifelong learning, are not always easily captured through conventional assessment instruments. Effective assessment therefore requires a balance between quantitative measures and qualitative approaches that allow students to demonstrate deeper learning and reflection.

One of the most significant takeaways from the session was the importance of communicating assessment findings. The facilitators repeatedly returned to a simple question: So what? Assessment data only becomes valuable when it is interpreted and shared in ways that matter to stakeholders. Different audiences require different messages. A faculty member may be interested in improvements in student research skills, while university leadership may focus on broader educational outcomes. This emphasis on purposeful communication reinforced the idea that assessment should not end with data collection; it should inform decision-making and continuous improvement.

As I reflect on the session, I am convinced that information literacy assessment represents an important opportunity for libraries in Ghana and across Africa. While resource limitations may constrain the adoption of complex assessment systems, the underlying principles remain highly relevant. We need to move beyond measuring participation and begin examining learning. We need to collect evidence that demonstrates how information literacy instruction contributes to academic success. Most importantly, we need to use assessment not as a mechanism of accountability alone, but as a tool for reflection, improvement, and advocacy. The Illinois experience reminded me that effective teaching is not defined solely by what is delivered in the classroom. It is also defined by what students learn, how that learning is demonstrated, and how we use evidence to continually improve our practice. For institutions like UHAS, embracing this perspective may be one of the most important steps toward strengthening information literacy education and demonstrating the enduring value of academic libraries in higher education.