Assessment: Measuring Services and Resources in Academic Libraries

5^th Biennial Conference for Academic Libraries in New York State

October 2-3, 2003

Sheraton Syracuse University Hotel and Conference Center

Panel on Information Literacy

Thomas Mackey & Trudi Jacobson, University at Albany

Nancy J. Becker, St. John’s University

Thomas Mackey, Assistant Professor, School of Information Studies and Policy, & Trudi Jacobson, University Library Coordinator of User Education Programs, University at Albany: Librarians Can’t Go It Alone: Effective Collaborative Models for Teaching Information Literacy

Handouts: PowerPoint slides, Information Literacy Collaborative Models, University at Albany New General Education Program Communication and Reasoning Competencies, Information Literacy Courses at the University at Albany, ISP301 sample course exercise.

They described Project Renaissance, an early project which was pre-information literacy but had a collaborative impact on campus. The Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning (CETL) continues to work with faculty developing workshops, etc. It is good to have faculty, administrators, and librarians talking together.

Workshops at CETL cover topics such as best practices, how to build in information literacy, how to craft assignments. Library doesn't do publicity; it is done by the campus committee.

Information literacy sub-committee came as a result of SUNY general education requirements. Much of the information literacy part of their program stemmed from this. The Undergraduate Academic Council wrote the definition for information literacy courses (gray handout).

The Information Literacy sub-committee reviews courses and provides feedback.

Information Literacy courses are listed on orchid handout.

Assessment ties into criteria for general ed requirements (gray handout).

Some classes use annotated bibliographies; others use different, more complex methods to assess learning.

The campus-wide sub-committee is very significant. They do things such as making sure there are enough seats in the classes and students take them in the first two years so they have the skills to build on for upper level courses. This type of institutional response is very significant in getting collaboration throughout the campus.

3 models for collaboration:

• Classroom teaching -- where the excitement happens. Needs to be engaged, and collaborative from the start of planning.
• Team teaching with librarians (the idea). The Geography 160 class is an example. CETL gives necessary grass-roots support.
• Virtual collaboration. This is not a substitute, but an aid. It needs to be integrated and utilized effectively. Librarians can be resource in the course management system.

They gave an example of Tom's 301 class, which was done in collaboration with Trudi.

The large class was broken into web teams to make smaller groups. They developed worksheet (in packet) to assist students in determining differences between scholarly and popular resources in searching for information and required exercises to get them thinking about their own experiences.

Other examples:

ISP 100, 500 students. This class can have a massive effect on ref desk in the library. The library works closely with professor to minimize problems and maximize benefits to students. Reference librarians provide feedback.

ISP301, the core in info science program. The goal is allowing students to be producers of information. It includes a collaborative web project and two research papers.

ISP361 includes archival resources.

Nancy J. Becker, Assistant Professor, Division of Library and Information Science, St. John’s University: Information Literacy, Best Practices, and Middle States

The focus of the Best Practices Conference was on assessment from the perspective of ACRL best practices. The project team was comprised of people from various areas of education; not just librarians. The conference included librarians, teaching faculty, and administrators to help strengthen the document.

Middle States is an outsider institution validating what is done on the inside. The library gains additional power with this support.

Best practices are not intended to be prescriptive.

The planning process became a crucial part of what people are struggling with. The library needs to link to concerns across the entire field, and accountability is one of these right now. Local campus issues are a factor too. For example, if a campus is pushing undergraduate research, then the library needs to be on that bandwagon and piggybacking on those efforts. Get out of the library and into the community.

In thinking of goals and objectives, the important thing is to connect on the institutional level, not just the library level. We must think of assessment at this level. We will be better prepared for the assessment process if we think on the goals and objectives level. What we are teaching is the underlying process; students should be able to transfer those skills to upper level courses based on this foundation. To do this we must focus on the product and we must also respond to different learning styles. People must be actively involved in the process. This also encourages them to view their interaction with new experiences in a new way.

How can we reach those who are the middle of the pack in adopting information literacy? We must facilitate the happening; we must connect with the leaders on campus who then serve as go-betweens with colleagues to help what we are trying to accomplish. We must capitalize on the idea of social learning, so instructors are not doing the work, the students are.

In assessment multiple perspectives (techniques) are important.

The most difficult task is how we measure the student learning level. The institutional level has Middle States as a partner, since it forces the institution to look at information literacy from that perspective.

We need to assess our programs ourselves. Are our programs working? We can't dismiss what students are saying about programs and our teaching. It is good to learn what works for others as well as examining ourselves. These programs are the beginning development of what should be better information literacy classes.

Various techniques are needed to measure different types of programs. The Best Practices Conference highlighted institutions that are stellar performers:

· Wartburg College: they spelled out goals and how they would assess them.

· Minnesota Community and Technical College: developed different ways of meeting goals reflective of local needs and goals.

· Weaver State, Utah: Their Provost is big proponent. It helps to have an administrator promote this.

· Zayed University, United Arab Emirates. Assessment matched goals of their institution with their student body.

The library has an idea of where objections will be. They should plan for these so they can respond effectively.

We as librarians need to let go a bit. This is not solely our issue. Technology hasn't taken away our role; in fact, it has made it more important. We need to get information literacy (or whatever it is called) on the agenda of the campus and into the classrooms.

There may be more there than we realize: our role is more of a catalyst or facilitator.

Questions for the Information Literacy panelists:

· Will the University at Albany have online courses for information literacy courses? SUNY system seems to centralize these online courses. In addition, they are not developed yet in upper level courses.

· Does The University at Albany program have assessment data? Library courses are doing pretest and post-test. Some concept mapping, other types of assessment are being done. Tom does entrance and exit surveys -- an internal assessment.

· Are students followed for four years? No. They would like to have questions on post-graduate student survey, but this isn’t yet done.

· Does anyone have information about costs of an information literacy implementation program? Nancy says that is should be course-driven so then there isn't a specific expense. Faculty need to have some incentive to do this. We need fewer one-shot classes in libraries that consume enormous amounts of time. Rather, we need a strategically planned program. A member of the audience noted that Susan Campbell (York College) costed this out.

· Will librarians continue to be on Middle States evaluation teams? Mr. Ratteray: This depends on how institutions structure report and want they want.