Purpose The aim of this paper is to present the Information Literacy Instruction Assessment Cycle (ILIAC), to describe the seven stages of the ILIAC, and to offer an extended example that demonstrates how the ILIAC increases librarian instructional abilities and improves student information literacy skills. Design/methodology/approach Employing survey design methodology, the researcher and participants use a rubric to code artifacts of student learning into pre‐set rubric categories. These categories are assigned point values and statistically analyzed to evaluate students and examine interrater reliability and validity. Findings By engaging in the ILIAC, librarians gain important data about the information behavior of students and a greater understanding of student strengths and weaknesses. The ILIAC encourages librarians to articulate learning outcomes clearly, analyze them meaningfully, celebrate learning achievements, and diagnose problem areas. In short, the ILIAC results in improved student learning and increased librarian instructional skills. In this study, the ILIAC improves students' ability to evaluate web sites for authority. Research limitations/implications The research focuses on librarians, instructors, and students at one institution. As a result, specific findings are not necessarily generalizable to those at other universities. Practical implications Academic librarians throughout higher education struggle to demonstrate the impact of information literacy instruction on student learning and development. The ILIAC provides a much needed conceptual framework to guide information literacy assessment efforts. Originality/value The paper applies the assessment cycle and “assessment for learning” theory to information literacy instruction. The ILIAC provides a model for future information literacy assessment projects. It also enables librarians to demonstrate, document, and increase the impact of information literacy instruction on student learning and development.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 124 citations exist upstream.