Information Literacy Tools – ProQuest Research Companion vs. Credo Information Literacy Modules

Comparative Review by CCL-EAR Committee

Over the course of fall 2016 and spring 2017, members of the CCL-EAR Committee were asked to write a comparative review of two information literacy tutorial products offered through the CCL library consortium: Proquest’s Research Companion and Credo’s Information Literacy Modules.

Download the full-text of our review evaluation for more detail.

If you have any experience with these products, please leave a comment and rate its appropriateness for use in a community college environment.

3 Responses to “Information Literacy Tools – ProQuest Research Companion vs. Credo Information Literacy Modules”

  1. Kate Hossain's rating and/or comments:

    I was interested to read this review as my library currently subscribes to ProQuest Research Companion and we haven’t been 100% happy with it and are curious how others perceive/use resources like these.

    I was surprised that cost wasn’t discussed more – we trialed Credo in 2014 (not sure if pricing has dropped) but it was prohibitively expensive and I would consider us a well-funded library. How does Credo get 4 stars for cost? The entry for cost for PRC just says “Relatively inexpensive but not the same product as
    the competition.” Without even mentioning if it’s a subscription based cost or purchase,etc. Another important factor with Credo is the extensive customization. That’s clearly a wonderful feature, but it does take a lot of staff time and skill which could be considered another type of cost.

    I do agree with most of the criticisms of PRC; we’ve been frustrated with the narrow scope, the usefulness of the assessments and the additional tools.

  2. April Cunningham's rating and/or comments:

    Kate, Thank you for your thoughtful comments. Based on our review of Credo we felt strongly that while the cost for either purchasing or subscribing to the IL content is high, the value is also high. The product can fill many different instructional needs including brief clips for one-shot sessions, modular lessons that embedded librarians can assign, and a full set of IL lessons that could be used throughout an IL course. ‘
    Although the labor required for customization could be considered an additional cost, we found that a) the existing content is more than sufficient to get started using the product in many different ways, b) when customization is desired, the process is intuitive, and c) the flexibility of the product will make it easier for librarians to achieve other time-intensive goals like program-level learning outcomes assessment and curation of locally created and openly licensed instructional content to which you want to direct students for class-related as well as just-in-time independent learning.
    I hope that these additional reflections help to make the comparison review more useful.
    Again, thank you for your feedback. I hope you are able to find a tool that works well for you and your students.

  3. Stephanie Rosenblatt's rating and/or comments:

    Credo’s product has also changed significantly between 2014 and when we conducted the review in late 2016. I looked at it for my own institution in 2015 and at that time it was quite similar to Proquest’s Research Companion.

Leave a Comment