1. Abeysekera L, Dawson P. Motivation and cognitive load in the flipped classroom: Definition, rationale and a call for research. Higher Education Research and Development. 2015;34:1–14 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2014.934336.
2. Ambrose SA, Bridges MW, DiPietro M, Lovett MC, Morman MK. How learning works: 7 research-based principles for smart teaching San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2010.
3. American Library Association. (1989). Presidential committee on information literacy: Final report. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/acrl/publications/whitepapers/presidential.
4. American Library Association. (2006). Information literacy competency standards for higher education. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/informationliteracycompetency.
5. American Library Association. (2015). Framework for information literacy for higher education. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework.
6. Andersen HL. «Constructive alignment» og risikoen for en forsimplende universitetspædagogik. Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift. 2010;9:30–35.
7. Anderson L, Brennan JP. An experiment in “flipped” teaching in freshman calculus. PRIMUS. 2015;25:861–875 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10511970.2015.1059916.
8. Andreassen, H. N., Figenschou, L., & Stenersen, M. (2016). Student interaction with online IL content: The impact of exam structure and design. Paper presented at the 4th European Conference on Information Literacy (ECIL), 10–13 October 2016, Prague.
9. Andreassen, H. N., Låg, T., & Stenersen, M. (2015). The long and winding road: Insights from student misconceptions. Paper presented at the 3rd European Conference on Information Literacy (ECIL), 19–22 October 2015, Tallinn.
10. Atkinson RC, Shiffrin RM. Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. In: New York: Academic Press; 1968;89–105. Spence KW, Spence JT, eds. The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory. Vol. 2.
11. Ausubel DP. The use of advance organizers in the learning and retention of meaningful verbal material. Journal of Educational Psychology. 1960;51(5):267–272 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0046669.
12. Baddeley A. Working memory: Theories, models, and controversies. Annual Review of Psychology. 2012;63(1):1–29 http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100422.
13. Baeten M, Kyndt E, Struyven K, Dochy F. Using student-centred learning environments to stimulate deep approaches to learning: Factors encouraging or discouraging their effectiveness. Educational Research Review. 2010;5:243–260 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2010.06.001.
14. Baker CI. Visual processing in the primate brain. In: Weiner IB, ed. Handbook of Psychology. 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2012;81–114.
15. Barkley EF, Major CH, Cross KP. Collaborative learning techniques: A handbook for college faculty 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2014.
16. Barr RB, Tagg J. From teaching to learning: A new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning. 1995;27:12–26.
17. Bednall TC, Kehoe EJ. Effects of self-regulatory instructional aids on self-directed study. Instructional Science. 2011;39(2):205–226 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11251-009-9125-6.
18. Belfield, C. R., & Levin, H. M. (2008). The price we pay: Economic and social consequences of inadequate education. Retrieved from http://site.ebrary.com/lib/tromsoub/docDetail.action?docID=10224509.
19. Bersin J. The blended learning book: Best practices, proven methodologies, and lessons learned San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer; 2004.
20. Biggs J. What the student does: Teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research & Development. 1999;18:57–75 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0729436990180105.
21. Biggs J, Tang C. Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does 4th ed. Berkshire: Open University Press; 2011.
22. Bjork EL, Bjork R. Making things hard on yourself, but in a good way: Creating desirable difficulties to enhance learning. In: Gernsbacher MA, Pew RW, Hough LM, Pomerantz EM, eds. Psychology and the real world: Essays illustrating fundamental contributions to society. New York: Worth Publishers; 2011.
23. Bjork RA, Dunlosky J, Kornell N. Self-regulated learning: Beliefs, techniques, and illusions. Annual Review of Psychology. 2013;64(1):417–444 http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143823.
24. Black P, William D. Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice. 1998;5:7–74 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102.
25. Bloom BS, Engelhart MD, Furst EJ, Hill WH, Krathwohl DR, eds. Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals, handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay Company; 1956.
26. Bloxham S, Boyd P. Developing effective assessment in higher education: A practical guide Maidenhead: Open University Press, McGraw-Hill Education; 2007.
27. Bologna Working Group. (2005). A Framework for qualifications of the European higher education area (Bologna Working Group Report on Qualifications Frameworks. Copenhagen, Danish Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation). Retrieved from http://ecahe.eu/w/images/7/76/A_Framework_for_Qualifications_for_the_European_Higher_Education_Area.pdf.
28. Booth C, Lowe MS, Tagge N, Stone SM. Degrees of impact: Analyzing the effects of progressive librarian course collaborations on student performance. College & Research Libraries. 2015;76:623–651 Available from http://dx.doi.org/10.5860/crl.76.5.623.
29. Boston University Center for Teaching and Learning. (n.d.) Using cases to teach [web page]. Retrieved January 1st from http://www.bu.edu/ctl/teaching-resources/using-case-studies-to-teach/.
30. Brabazon T. Digital dieting: From information obesity to intellectual fitness Farnham: Ashgate Publishing; 2013.
31. Brookfield SD, Preskill S. Discussion as a way of teaching: Tools and techniques for democratic classrooms 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2005.
32. Bruce C, Hughes H, Somerville MM. Supporting informed learners in the twenty-first century. Library Trends. 2012;60:522–545 http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/lib.2012.0009.
33. Burgess AW, McGregor DM, Mellis CM. Applying established guidelines to team-based learning programs in medical schools: A systematic review. Academic Medicine. 2014;89(4):678–688 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000162.
34. Bunce DM, Flens EA, Neiles KY. How long can students pay attention in class? A study of student attention decline using clickers. Journal of Chemical Education. 2010;87(12):1438–1443 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed100409p.
35. Butcher C, Davies C, Highton M. Designing learning: From module outline to effective teaching. London: Routledge; 2006.
36. Cameron L, Wise SL, Lottridge SM. The development and validation of the information literacy test. College & Research Libraries. 2007;68:229–237 http://dx.doi.org/10.5860/crl.68.3.229.
37. Carpenter SK. Testing enhances the transfer of learning. Current Directions in Psychological Science. 2012;21(5):279–283 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0963721412452728.
38. Carroll J. A handbook for deterring plagiarism in higher education Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development; 2002.
39. Carroll J. Plagiarism as a threat to learning: An educational response. In: Joughin G, ed. Assessment, learning and judgement in higher education. Berlin: Springer; 2009;115–132.
40. Carroll J. A handbook for deterring plagiarism in higher education 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development; 2007.
41. Carter, G. (2015, August 12). Goals of science vs goals of scientists (& a love letter to PLOS One) [blog post]. Retrieved from https://socialbat.org/2015/08/12/goals-of-science-vs-goals-of-scientists-a-love-letter-for-plos-one/.
42. Chase WG, Simon HA. Perception in chess. Cognitive Psychology. 1973;4(1):55–81.
43. Chen D-TV, Wang Y-M, Lee WC. Challenges confronting beginning researchers in conducting literature reviews. Studies in Continuing Education. 2016;38:47–60 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0158037X.2015.1030335.
44. Christie H, Tett L, Cree VE, McCune V. It all just clicked”: A longitudinal perspective on transitions within university. Studies in Higher Education. 2016;41:478–490 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.942271.
45. CEDEFOP. (2010). Skills supply and demand in Europe: Medium-term forecast up to 2020 (3052). Retrieved from http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/files/3052_en.pdf.
46. Clark, D. (2015). Bloom’s taxonomy: The affective domain [web page]. Retrieved September 25, 2016, from http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/Bloom/affective_domain.html.
47. Cochrane C. Embedding information literacy in an undergraduate management degree: Lecturers’ and students’ perspectives. Education for Information. 2006;24:97–123.
48. Conole, G., & Creanor, L. (2007). In their own words: Exploring the learner’s perspective on e-learning. Retrieved from http://www.webarchive.org.uk/wayback/archive/20140615220212/http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/elearningpedagogy/iowfinal.pdf.
49. Cowan N. The magical mystery four: How is working memory capacity limited, and why? Current Directions in Psychological Science. 2010;19(1):51–57 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0963721409359277.
50. Davidson RA. Relationship of study approach and exam performance. Journal of Accounting Education. 2002;20(1):29–44 Available from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0748-5751(01)00025-2.
51. De Bruyckere P, Kirschner PA, Hulshof CD. Urban myths about learning and education Amsterdam: Academic Press; 2015.
52. Deci EL, Vallerand RJ, Pelletier LG, Ryan RM. Motivation and education: The self-determination perspective. Educational Psychologist. 1991;26(3–4):325–346 Available from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00461520.1991.9653137.
53. De Clercq M, Galand B, Frenay M. Transition from high school to university: A person-centered approach to academic achievement. European Journal of Psychology of Education. 2017;32:39–59 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10212-016-0298-5.
54. Dennehy E. Is deep learning rewarded? A quantitative study on the relationship between learning approaches and academic scores. International Journal of Teaching and Case Studies. 2014;5(1):54–68.
55. Diseth Å. Approaches to learning, course experience and examination grade among undergraduate psychology students: Testing of mediator effects and construct validity. Studies in Higher Education. 2007;32(3):373–388 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075070701346949.
56. Dosher B, Lu Z-L. Attention: Selective. In: Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications; 2010;100–103. Goldstein EB, ed. Encyclopedia of Perception. Vol. 1.
57. Dunlosky J, Rawson KA. Practice tests, spaced practice, and successive relearning: Tips for classroom use and for guiding students’ learning. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology. 2015;1(1):72–78 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/stl0000024.
58. Dunlosky J, Rawson KA, Marsh EJ, Nathan MJ, Willingham DT. Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques: Promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology. Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 2013;14(1):4–58 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1529100612453266.
59. Dunning D, Johnson K, Ehrlinger J, Kruger J. Why people fail to recognize their own incompetence. Current Directions in Psychological Science. 2003;12:83–87 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.01235.
60. Dweck CS. Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist. 1986;41:1040–1048 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.41.10.1040.
61. Dysthe O, Hertzberg F, Hoel TL. Skrive for å lære: Skriving i høyere utdanning, 2 utgave Oslo: Abstrakt forlag; 2010.
62. Education for Change. (2012). Researchers of tomorrow: The research behaviour of generation Y doctoral students. Retrieved from http://www.webarchive.org.uk/wayback/archive/20140614040703/http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/publications/reports/2012/Researchers-of-Tomorrow.pdf.
63. Entwistle N. Teaching for understanding at university: Deep approaches and distinctive ways of thinking Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan; 2009.
64. Entwistle N, Hanley M, Hounsell D. Identifying distinctive approaches to studying. Higher Education. 1979;8:365–380 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf01680525.
65. Ericsson KA, Kintsch W. Long-term working memory. Psychological Review. 1995;102(2):211–245 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.102.2.211.
66. European Commission (2015). Dropout and completion in higher education in Europe: Main report. doi:10.2766/826962.
67. Falchikov N. Improving assessment through student involvement London: Routledge; 2004.
68. Fleming-May R, Yuro L. From student to scholar: The academic library and social sciences PhD students’ transformation. Portal: Libraries and the Academy. 2009;9:199–221 http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/pla.0.0040.
69. Foldnes N. The flipped classroom and cooperative learning: Evidence from a randomised experiment. Active Learning in Higher Education. 2016;17:39–49 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1469787415616726.
70. Folk CL. Attention: Divided. In: Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications; 2010;84–87. Goldstein EB, ed. Encyclopedia of Perception. Vol. 1.
71. Fossheim HJ, Ingierd H. Innledende bemerkninger. In: Fossheim HJ, Ingierd H, eds. Etisk skjønn i forskning. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget; 2015;9–10.
72. Freeman S, Eddy SL, McDonough M, et al. Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2014;111:8410–8415 http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111.
73. Gallant TB. Academic integrity in the twenty-first century: A teaching and learning imperative Hoboken, NJ: Jossey-Bass; 2008.
74. Garson, D. (2016). Doctoral students becoming researchers: An innovative literature review course. Paper presented at Creating Knowledge VIII, Reykjavik.
75. Gow L, Kember D. Conceptions of teaching and their relationship to student learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology. 1993;63:20–23 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1993.tb01039.x.
76. Green R. Information illiteracy: Examining our assumptions. The Journal of Academic Librarianship. 2010;36:313–319 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2010.05.005.
77. Greenberg KP. Rubric use in formative assessment: A detailed behavioral rubric helps students improve their scientific writing skills. Teaching of Psychology. 2015;42:211–217 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0098628315587618.
78. Gross M, Latham D. What’s skill got to do with it?: Information literacy skills and self-views of ability among first-year college students. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2012;63:574–583 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.21681.
79. Gurung RAR, Weidert J, Jeske A. Focusing on how students study. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. 2010;10(1):28–35.
80. Hattie J. Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement London: Routledge; 2009.
81. Hattie J. Which strategies best enhance teaching and learning in higher education? In: Mashek D, Hammer EY, eds. Empirical Research in Teaching and Learning: Contributions from Social Psychology. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd; 2011;130–142.
82. Hattie J. The applicability of visible learning to higher education. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology. 2015;1:79–91 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/stl0000021.
83. Hattie J, Yates GCR. Visible learning and the science of how we learn London: Routledge; 2014.
84. Heublein U. Student drop-out from German higher education institutions. European Journal of Education. 2014;49:497–513 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12097.
85. Houtman E. “Trying to figure it out”: Academic librarians talk about learning to teach. Library and Information Research. 2010;34(107):18–40.
86. Howard RM. Plagiarism in higher education: An academic literacies issue? Introduction. In: Bretag T, ed. Handbook of Academic Integrity. 2015;1–2. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-079-7_70-1.
87. Hughes G, Smail O. Which aspects of university life are most and least helpful in the transition to HE? A qualitative snapshot of student perceptions. Journal of Further and Higher Education. 2015;39:466–480 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2014.971109.
88. iKomp. (2016, February 5). Retrieved from www.ikomp.no.
89. Imsen G. Lærerens verden: Innføring i generell didaktikk 4th ed. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget; 2009.
90. International Center for Academic Integrity. (1999). The Fundamental values of academic integrity [Online]. Retrieved from www.academicintegrity.org/icai/assets/Revised_FV_2014.pdf.
91. Ison DC. Plagiarism among dissertations: Prevalence at online institutions. Journal of Academic Ethics. 2012;10:227–236 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10805-012-9165-4.
92. Jacobson TE, Mackey TP. Proposing a metaliteracy model to redefine information literacy. Communications in Information Literacy. 2013;7:84–91 Retrieved from http://www.comminfolit.org/.
93. Jensen JL, Kummer TA, d M Godoy PD. Improvements from a flipped classroom may simply be the fruits of active learning. CBE Life Sciences Education. 2015;14:1–12 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-08-0129.
94. Johnstone AH, Percival F. Attention breaks in lectures. Education in Chemistry. 1976;13(2):49–50.
95. Johnson DW, Johnson RT, Smith KA. Cooperative learning: Improving university instruction by basing practice on validated theory. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching. 2014;25(3/4):85–118.
96. Julien H, Genuis SK. Librarians’ experiences of the teaching role: A national survey of librarians. Library & Information Science Research. 2011;33:103–111 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2010.09.005.
97. Kahneman D. Thinking, fast and slow London: Allen Lane; 2011.
98. Kahu E, Stephens C, Leach L, Zepke N. Linking academic emotions and student engagement: Mature-aged distance students’ transition to university. Journal of Further and Higher Education. 2015;39:1–17 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2014.895305.
99. Karpicke JD. Retrieval-based learning: Active retrieval promotes meaningful learning. Current Directions in Psychological Science. 2012;21(3):157–163 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0963721412443552.
100. Karpicke JD, Blunt JR. Retrieval practice produces more learning than elaborative studying with concept mapping. Science. 2011;331(6018):772–775 http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1199327.
101. Keene J, Colvin J, Sissons J. Mapping student information literacy activity against Bloom’s taxonomy of cognitive skills. Journal of Information Literacy. 2010;4:6–21 Available from http://dx.doi.org/10.11645/4.1.189.
102. Kember D. Interpreting student workload and the factors which shape students’ perceptions of their workload. Studies in Higher Education. 2004;29:165–184 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0307507042000190778.
103. Kember D, Gow L. Orientations to teaching and their effect on the quality of student learning. The Journal of Higher Education. 1994;65:58–74 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2943877.
104. Kirschner PA, van Merriënboer JJG. Do learners really know best? Urban legends in education. Educational Psychologist. 2013;48:169–183 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2013.804395.
105. Kirschner F, Paas F, Kirschner PA. A cognitive load approach to collaborative learning: United brains for complex tasks. Educational Psychology Review. 2009;21(1):31–42 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10648-008-9095-2.
106. Kirschner PA, Sweller J, Clark RE. Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist. 2006;41:75–86 http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1.
107. Kjelstadli K. Akademisk kapitalisme Oslo: Res Publica; 2010.
108. Krathwohl D. A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice. 2002;41:212–218 http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2.
109. Krathwohl DR, Bloom BS, Masia BB. Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals Handbook II: Affective domain New York: David McKay Co; 1973.
110. Kruger J, Dunning D. Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1999;77:1121–1134 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1121.
111. Kuhlthau CC. Seeking meaning: A process approach to library and information services Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited; 2004.
112. Kuhlthau CC, Maniotes LK, Caspari AK. Guided inquiry: Learning in the 21st century 2 ed. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited; 2015.
113. Kunnskapsdepartementet. (2011, version of April 2014). Nasjonalt kvalifikasjonsrammeverk for livslang læring (NKR). Retrieved from https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/e579f913fa1d45c2bf2219afc726670b/nkr.pdf.
114. Kusurkar RA, Croiset G, Ten Cate OTJ. Twelve tips to stimulate intrinsic motivation in students through autonomy-supportive classroom teaching derived from Self-Determination Theory. Medical Teacher. 2011;33:978–982 http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2011.599896.
115. Larsen DP, Butler AC, Roediger III HL. Test-enhanced learning in medical education. Medical Education. 2008;42(10):959–966 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2008.03124.x.
116. Lauvås P, Lycke KH, Handal G. Kollegaveiledning i skolen Oslo: Cappelen; 2004.
117. Li L, Liu X, Steckelberg AL. Assessor or assessee: How student learning improves by giving and receiving peer feedback. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2010;41:525–536 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00968.x.
118. Lycke KH. Problembasert læring, caseundervisning og prosjektarbeid In Strømsø H I, Lycke K.H og. In: Lauvås P, ed. Når læring er det viktigste: Undervisning i høyere utdanning. Oslo: Cappelen Damm Akademisk; 2016;171–191.
119. Lødding, B., & Aamodt, P. O. (2015). Studieforberedt etter studieforberedende? Overgangen mellom studieforberedende utdanningsprogram og høyere utdanning belyst gjennom gruppesamtaler med lærere, studenter og elever (NIFU-rapport 2015:28). Retrieved from http://www.nifu.no/publications/1286780/.
120. Løkse M, Andreassen HN, Låg T, Stenersen M. Bridging the gap: Easing the transition to higher education with an information literacy MOOC. In: Hoffman S, ed. Dynamic research support for academic libraries. London: Facet Publishing; 2016;119–131.
121. Låg T. Flipped versus traditional information literacy sessions: Student perceptions and cognitions. Nordic Journal of Information Literacy in Higher Education. 2016;8(1):45–50 Available from http://dx.doi.org/10.15845/noril.v8i1.260.
122. Mackey TP, Jacobson TE. Reframing information literacy as a metaliteracy. College & Research Libraries. 2011;72:62–78 http://dx.doi.org/10.5860/crl-76r1.
123. Marton F, Säljö R. On qualitative differences in learning: I—Outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology. 1976a;46:4–11.
124. Marton F, Säljö R. On qualitative differences in learning: II—Outcome as a function of the learners conception of the task. British Journal of Educational Psychology. 1976b;46:115–127.
125. May W, Chung E-K, Elliott D, Fisher D. The relationship between medical students’ learning approaches and performance on a summative high-stakes clinical performance examination. Medical Teacher. 2012;34(4):e236–e241 http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2012.652995.
126. Mayer RE. Multimedia learning 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2009.
127. Mayer RE. Applying the science of learning Boston, MA: Pearson Education; 2011.
128. McCabe A, O’Connor U. Student-centred learning: The role and responsibility of the lecturer. Teaching in Higher Education. 2014;19:350–359 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2013.860111.
129. McCabe J. Metacognitive awareness of learning strategies in undergraduates. Memory & Cognition. 2011;39(3):462–476 http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13421-010-0035-2.
130. McCune V, Entwistle N. Cultivating the disposition to understand in 21st century university education. Learning and Individual Differences. 2011;21(3):303–310 doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2010.11.017.
131. McDaniel MA, Agarwal PK, Huelser BJ, McDermott KB, Roediger III HL. Test-enhanced learning in a middle school science classroom: The effects of quiz frequency and placement. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2011;103(2):399–414 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0021782.
132. McDermott KB, Agarwal PK, D’Antonio L, Roediger III HL, McDaniel MA. Both multiple-choice and short-answer quizzes enhance later exam performance in middle and high school classes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. 2014;20(1):3–21 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xap0000004.
133. McKernan J. A critique of instructional objectives. Educational Enquiry. 2010;1:57–67.
134. McLoughlin C, Lee MJW. Personalised and self regulated learning in the Web 2.0 era: International exemplars of innovative pedagogy using social software. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology. 2010;26:28–43.
135. McPhail R. Pre-university prepared students: A programme for facilitating the transition from secondary to tertiary education. Teaching in Higher Education. 2015;20:652–665 Available from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2015.1062360.
136. McWilliams R, Allan Q. Embedding academic literacy skills: Towards a best practice model. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice. 2014;11 Retrieved from http://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol11/iss3/8.
137. Miller GA. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review. 1956;63(2):81–97 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0043158.
138. Ministry of Education and Research. (2012). Norwegian Qualifications Framework: Levels and learning outcomes descriptors. Retrieved from https://www.regjeringen.no/globalassets/upload/kd/vedlegg/internasjonalt/nqr_higher_education.pdf.
139. Morehead K, Rhodes MG, DeLozier S. Instructor and student knowledge of study strategies. Memory. 2015;24:257–271 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2014.1001992.
140. Morrow JA, Ackermann ME. Intention to persist and retention of first-year students: The importance of motivation and sense of belonging. College Student Journal. 2012;46(3):483–491.
141. Nierenberg E, Fjeldbu ØG. How much do first-year undergraduate students in Norway know about information literacy? Journal of Information Literacy. 2015;9:15–33 http://dx.doi.org/10.11645/9.1.1983.
142. Nowotny H, Scott P, Gibbons M. Re-thinking science: Knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty Cambridge: Polity; 2001.
143. Oakleaf M. Staying on track with rubric assessment: Five institutions investigate information literacy learning. Peer Review. 2011;13(4):18–21.
144. OECD. (2014). Education at a glance 2014: OECD indicators. Available from http://www.oecd.org/edu/eag.htm/.
145. Opdal PM. Pedagogisk-filosofiske analyser Bergen: Fagbokforlaget; 2008.
146. Otto P. Librarians, libraries, and the scholarship of teaching and learning. New Directions for Teaching and Learning. 2014;2014(139):77–93 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tl.20106.
147. Owusu-Ansah EK. Debating definitions of information literacy: Enough is enough!. Library Review. 2005;54:366–374 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00242530510605494.
148. Pagell RA, Munoo R. Information literacy for the information literate: A model and case study from the Wuhan UNESCO training the trainers in information literacy program. The International Information & Library Review. 2010;42(2):84–90 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iilr.2010.04.001.
149. Pai H-H, Sears DA, Maeda Y. Effects of small-group learning on transfer: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review. 2015;27(1):79–102 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10648-014-9260-8.
150. Pashler H, McDaniel M, Rohrer D, Bjork R. Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 2008;9:105–119 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x.
151. Patterson V, Prendeville N. A study of progression in Irish higher education institutions, 2010/11 to 2011/12 Dublin: Higher Education Authority; 2014; Retrieved from http://hdl.voced.edu.au/10707/332132.
152. Postareff L, Lindblom-Ylänne S. Variation in teachers’ descriptions of teaching: Broadening the understanding of teaching in higher education. Learning and Instruction. 2008;18:109–120 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.01.008.
153. Prince M. Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education. 2004;93:223–231 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x.
154. Pritchard M, Lee L. What makes an upper-division course upper-division? Differing perspectives of students and faculty. College Quarterly. 2011;14 Retrieved from http://collegequarterly.ca/2011-vol14-num04-fall/pritchard-lee.html.
155. Prøitz, T. S. (2014). Conceptualisations of learning outcomes in education—An explorative cross-case analysis of policymakers, teachers and scholars (PhD dissertation). University of Oslo. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/11250/278896.
156. Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education. (2014). UK Quality Code for Higher Education. Part A: Setting and maintaining academic standards. The Frameworks for Higher Education Qualifications of UK Degree-Awarding Bodies. Retrieved from http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/Publications/Documents/qualifications-frameworks.pdf.
157. Ramsden P. Learning to teach in higher education 2 ed. London: RoutledgeFalmer; 2003.
158. Rawson KA, Dunlosky J, Sciartelli SM. The Power of successive relearning: Improving performance on course exams and long-term retention. Educational Psychology Review. 2013;25:523–548 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10648-013-9240-4.
159. Rawson KA, Vaughn KE, Carpenter SK. Does the benefit of testing depend on lag, and if so, why? Evaluating the elaborative retrieval hypothesis. Memory and Cognition. 2015;43:619–633 http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13421-014-0477-z.
160. Reeve J. Why teachers adopt a controlling motivating style and how they can become more autonomy supportive. Educational Psychologist. 2009;44:159–175 Available from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00461520903028990.
161. Reeves L, Nishimuta C, McMillan J, Godin C. Faculty outreach: A win–win proposition. In: Katz LS, ed. Outreach services in academic and special libraries. Hoboken, NJ: Taylor & Francis; 2004;57–68.
162. Reid WA, Duvall E, Evans P. Relationship between assessment results and approaches to learning and studying in Year Two medical students. Medical Education. 2007;41:754–762 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2007.02801.x.
163. Risko EF, Anderson N, Sarwal A, Engelhardt M, Kingstone A. Everyday attention: Variation in mind wandering and memory in a lecture. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 2012;26:234–242 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acp.1814.
164. Ritterbush J. Assessing academic library services to distance learners: A literature review of perspectives from librarians, students, and faculty. The Reference Librarian. 2013;55:26–36 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02763877.2014.853274.
165. Roig, M. (2013). Avoiding plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and other questionable writing practices: A guide to ethical writing. Retrieved from http://ori.hhs.gov/avoiding-plagiarism-self-plagiarism-and-other-questionable-writing-practices-guide-ethical-writing.
166. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Theory [web page]. Retrieved January 1st, from http://selfdeterminationtheory.org/theory/.
167. Roediger III HL, Agarwal PK, McDaniel MA, McDermott KB. Test-enhanced learning in the classroom: Long-term improvements from quizzing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. 2011;17(4):382–395 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0026252.
168. Rohrer D, Pashler H. Learning styles: Where’s the evidence? Medical Education. 2012;46:634–635 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04273.x.
169. Rowland CA. The effect of testing versus restudy on retention: A meta-analytic review of the testing effect. Psychological Bulletin. 2014;140(6):1432–1463 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0037559.
170. Rust C. Developing a variety of assessment methods. Reflections on Assessment. Volume 1 Gloucester: Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education; 2005;179–186.
171. Rust C. Towards a scholarship of assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. 2007;32:229–237.
172. Salomon, D., Glassman, J., & Lee, S. (2016). Embedded peer inquiry specialists: A gateway to information literacy. Paper presented at Creating Knowledge VIII, Reykjavík.
173. Salamonson Y, Weaver R, Chang S, et al. Learning approaches as predictors of academic performance in first year health and science students. Nurse Education Today. 2013;33(7):729–733 doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2013.01.013.
174. Saunders L. The future of information literacy in academic libraries: A delphi study. Portal: Libraries and the Academy. 2008;9:99–114 http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/pla.0.0030.
175. Schilling K, Applegate R. Best methods for evaluating educational impact: A comparison of the efficacy of commonly used measures of library instruction. Journal of the Medical Library Association. 2012;100:258–269 http://dx.doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.100.4.007.
176. Shanley MK, Johnston J. 8 things first-year students fear about college. Journal of College Admission. 2008;201:3–7.
177. Shulman LS. Report of the President Stanford, CA: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching; 2002; (Report to the Board of Trustees).
178. Siegel H. Educating reason: Rationality, critical thinking, and education London: Routledge; 1988.
179. Simons DJ, Chabris CF. Gorillas in our midst: Sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic events. Perception. 1999;28(9):1059–1074.
180. Singapore Statement on Research Integrity. (2010). Retrieved from www.singaporestatement.org.
181. Smit AS, Eling PATM, Coenen AML. Mental effort causes vigilance decrease due to resource depletion. Acta Psychologica. 2004;115(1):35–42 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2003.11.001.
182. Smith E. Developing an information skills curriculum for the sciences. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship 2003; http://dx.doi.org/10.5062/F48P5XGT.
183. Smith K, Hopkins C. Great expectations: Sixth-formers’ perceptions of teaching and learning in degree-level English. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education. 2005;4:304–318 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1474022205056173.
184. Smith KJ, Davy JA, Rosenberg DL. An empirical analysis of an alternative configuration of the Academic Motivation Scale. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice. 2012;19:231–250 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2011.608347.
185. Solberg M, Hansen FT. On Academic Bildung in higher education: A Scandinavian approach. In: Fossland T, Mathiasen H, Solberg M, eds. Academic Bildung in net-based higher education: Moving beyond learning. London: Routledge; 2015;28–54.
186. Soria KM, Fransen J, Nackerud S. Library use and undergraduate student outcomes: New evidence for students’ retention and academic success. Portal: Libraries and the Academy. 2013;13(2):147–164 Retrieved from https://muse.jhu.edu/article/504593.
187. Stone G, Ramsden B. Library impact data project: Looking for the link between library usage and student attainment. College & Research Libraries. 2013;74:546–559 http://dx.doi.org/10.5860/crl12-406.
188. Swales J, Feak C. Academic writing for graduate students. Ann Arbor, MI University of Michigan Press 1994.
189. Svinicki M, McKeachie WJ, Nicol D, et al. McKeachie’s teaching tips: Strategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers 13th. ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning; 2011.
190. Svirko E, Mellanby J. Attitudes to e-learning, learning style and achievement in learning neuroanatomy by medical students. Medical Teacher. 2008;30:e219–e227 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01421590802334275.
191. Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory [online version]. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-1-4419-8126-4/page/1.
192. Szpunar KK, Khan NY, Schacter DL. Interpolated memory tests reduce mind wandering and improve learning of online lectures. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2013;110(16):6313–6317 http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1221764110.
193. Szpunar KK, Moulton ST, Schacter DL. Mind wandering and education: From the classroom to online learning. Frontiers in Psychology 2013;4 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00495.
194. Talikka, M. (2006). Teaching information literacy to future university students. Paper presented at Constructing knowledge in an information society, Tampere.
195. Tolkien JRR. The lord of the rings: The fellowship of the ring London: HarperCollins; 1991; [1954].
196. Tomcho TJ, Foels R. Meta-analysis of group learning activities: Empirically based teaching recommendations. Teaching of Psychology. 2012;39(3):159–169 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0098628312450414.
197. Trigwell K, Prosser M, Waterhouse F. Relations between teachers’ approaches to teaching and students’ approaches to learning. Higher Education. 1999;37:57–70.
198. UNESCO. (2005). Beacons of the information society: The Alexandria proclamation on information literacy and lifelong learning. Alexandria, Egypt: High-Level Colloquium on Information Literacy and Lifelong Learning. Retrived from http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/ev.php-URL_ID=20891&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html.
199. Uttl B, White CA, Gonzalez DW. Meta-analysis of faculty’s teaching effectiveness: Student evaluation of teaching ratings and student learning are not related. Studies in Educational Evaluation Advance online publication 2016; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.08.007.
200. Vallerand RJ, Pelletier LG, Blais MR, Briere NM, Senecal C, Vallieres EF. The Academic Motivation Scale: A measure of intrinsic, extrinsic, and amotivation in education. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 1992;52:1003–1017.
201. van Helvoort J. A scoring rubric for performance assessment of information literacy in Dutch Higher Education. Journal of Information Literacy. 2010;4:22–39 http://dx.doi.org/10.11645/4.1.1256.
202. Virkus S. Information literacy in Europe: A literature review. Information Research. 2003;8 paper no. 159. Retrieved from http://www.informationr.net/ir/8-4/paper159.html.
203. Walker GE, Golde CM, Jones L, Bueschel AC, Hutchings P, eds. The formation of scholars: Rethinking doctoral education for the twenty-first century. Stanford, CA: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching; 2008.
204. Walsh A. Information literacy assessment: Where do we start? Journal of Librarianship and Information Science. 2009;41:19–28 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0961000608099896.
205. Webber S, Johnston B. Conceptions of information literacy: New perspectives and implications. Journal of Information Science. 2000;26(6):381–397 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/016555150002600602.
206. Wheeler E, McKinney P. Are librarians teachers? Investigating academic librarians’ perceptions of their own teaching skills. Journal of Information Literacy. 2015;9(2):111–128 http://dx.doi.org/10.11645/9.2.1985.
207. Whitworth A. Information obesity Oxford: Chandos Publishing; 2009.
208. William D. Embedded formative assessment Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press; 2011.
209. Willingham DT, Hughes EM, Dobolyi DG. The scientific status of learning styles theories. Teaching of Psychology. 2015;42:266–271 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0098628315589505.
210. Wilson K, Korn JH. Attention during lectures: Beyond ten minutes. Teaching of Psychology. 2007;34(2):85–89 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00986280701291291.
211. Wingate U. Academic literacy and student diversity: The case for inclusive practice Bristol: Multilingual matters; 2015.
212. Wissman KT, Rawson KA. Why does collaborative retrieval improve memory? Enhanced relational and item-specific processing. Journal of Memory and Language. 2015;84:75–87 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2015.05.003.
213. Yong D, Levy R, Lape N. Why no difference? A controlled flipped classroom study for an introductory differential equations course. PRIMUS. 2015;25:907–921 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10511970.2015.1031307.
214. Zaromb F, Roediger H. The testing effect in free recall is associated with enhanced organizational processes. Memory and Cognition. 2010;38(8):995–1008 http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/MC.38.8.995.
