In her 2007 systematic review of how health libraries evaluate their training activities, Alison Brettle points out that these evaluations are designed to address various questions:  Are class participants learning?  Are resources being used in the best way?  Are more resources needed?  What changes should be made to improve materials and methods?   This review focuses on measures that examine changes in class participants’ knowledge, skills, or behavior.  The majority were used in these study designs:

• Pre-experimental (one group, post-test only; one group with pre- and post-test; two groups post-test only)
• Quasi-experimental (control group, pre- and post-testing without randomization)
• Randomized controlled experiments

A few of the studies in the review were qualitative, and some were descriptive.  Methods of measuring outcomes of information skills classes included:

• A score sheet or checklist listing features of a search
• Surveys, including perceptions of the training, participant’s confidence, and ability to use knowledge gained
• The Objective Structured Clinical Exam (OCSE) in which medical students perform clinical tasks in a short period of time, with literature searching included as one of the tasks

Appendix 2 of the article lists the studies that Brettle reviewed, describes methodologies and tools, and indicates how (or whether) instruments were deemed reliable and valid.  (Quick review–reliable instruments produce the same results if used again in the same situation; valid instruments actually measure what they claim to measure, and might produce generalizable results.)

This systematic review is open access and you can find the full text here:
Brettle, A. “Evaluating information skills training in health
libraries: a systematic review.” Health Information & Libraries Journal. 24: (Supplement s1): 18–37, December 2007.