Listening to the customer Assessment that makes a difference Student learning
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Listening to the customer Assessment that makes a difference Student learning

on

  • 1,984 views

LLAMA LOMS Program: Listening to the Customer: Using Assessment ...

LLAMA LOMS Program: Listening to the Customer: Using Assessment
Results to Make a Difference
ALA Annual (Chicago)
Sunday, July 11, 2009
Catherine Haras (California State University, Los Angeles)

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,984
Views on SlideShare
1,952
Embed Views
32

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0

3 Embeds 32

http://www.lama.ala.org 22
http://www.llama.ala.org 8
http://www.slideshare.net 2

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Increased emphasis on assessment in higher education—chance to help the university or college.
  • Increased emphasis on assessment in higher education—chance to help the university or college.
  • System-wide support builds a local program; lots of dialog between the CSUs.
  • Indicators are often outside the library

Listening to the customer Assessment that makes a difference Student learning Listening to the customer Assessment that makes a difference Student learning Presentation Transcript

  • Listening to the customer Assessment that makes a difference Student learning Catherine Haras Information Literacy Coordinator California State University, Los Angeles ALA Annual, Chicago 2009
  • Library Facts
    • Total volumes 1,205,256
    • Total number of teaching librarians 12
    • Students attending Library instruction 2007-2008 17,343 (684 sessions)
    • Robust information literacy program
  • Our customers
    • First generation college students
    • Transfer/commuter population
    • Latino
    • Graduates of the LAUSD, where information literacy is unmandated
  • Why assess?
    • To increase the quality of the Library’s instruction program
    • To ensure compliance/instruction across the Colleges
    • Accreditation and WASC reviews
    • Do we know what our students know?
  • In place
    • System-wide CSU Information Competence Initiative
    • Information Literacy Coordinator
    • Liaison model of IL: faculty and librarian cooperation
    • Library SLOs adapted from ACRL
    • Participants on iSkills beta testing to assess ICT literacy
  • What did we do?
    • We used several assessments based on our constituents.
      • Homegrown and standardized (iSkills/IC3)
      • Direct and indirect
      • Qualitative and quantitative
    • We assessed librarians, faculty, and students.
    • We took advantage of CSU participation in the ETS iSkills project.
    • We were prepared to learn from our mistakes.
  • 2 homegrown examples
    • We assessed students and faculty
      • Students, via quiz
      • Faculty, via focus groups and an indirect survey
  • Assessment of the students: homegrown (direct)
      • Tested student research skills levels
      • Created questions based on the ACRL Standards outcomes
      • Targeted a gateway freshman experience course that all incoming freshmen/transfers must take
      • Created a 27-item quiz in WebCT/Blackboard
      • Administered quiz 5 consecutive quarters, Fall 05-Fall 06, whether faculty wanted to or not
  • Sample question
      • Campbell, S. (2006). Perceptions of mobile phones in
      • college classrooms: Ringing, cheating, and
      • classroom policies. Communication Education , 55 ,
      • 280-294.
  • Direct assessment Results
      • N=2,934
      • Mean score = 71.5% or a C average
      • 2-point difference between freshmen and transfers
      • Colleges performed equally poorly
      • Questions a student was most likely to get wrong:
        • Reading citations
        • Topic formulation
        • Database search logic
  • Assessment Results
      • Students found the pretest reflective
      • They are gamers
      • They are reading averse
      • They are affective learners
  • Assessment of the faculty: homegrown (indirect)
      • Held a series of faculty focus groups
      • Created information literacy advisory of 18 key faculty
      • Advisory created a 20 Q survey
      • Surveyed entire campus by email, reaching a generalizable 30% of tenured faculty on students’ research habits (N=235)
  • (Indirect) Assessment Results
    My students can: Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree Don't know a. Narrow or focus a research topic 3% (6) 14% (28) 62% (125) 11% (23) 9% (19) b. Formulate a search query 3% (6) 15% (30) 57% (114) 10% (20) 15% (31) f. Read or trace a bibliographic citation 3% (6) 17% (34) 53% (107) 8% (16) 19% (38)
  • Changes based on (student) assessment
      • Based on the student scores, campus FYE curriculum was changed.
          • New IHE 101 model with strong IL emphasis piloted and adopted by campus colleges.
          • Library created an information jeopardy game; with virtual assessment
  • Indicators of success
    • Information literacy is now assessed at program review
    • Increase in type and kind of library session
    • Increased collaboration: consultation on programmatic IL and assignment design
    • CSULA IL program commended by WASC
    • GE overhaul; campus considering a mandated IL course
  • Continuous improvement
      • Approval of new IHE 101 pilot
      • Program Review self-study 2006-2007
      • WASC accreditation 2006-2010
        • Institutional proposal Fall 2006
        • Capacity and preparatory review Fall 2008
        • Educational Effectiveness review Spring 2010
  • Learning takes place in context. B e prepared to assess more than the student.
  • Work with your culture
    • Accept legacy issues particular to your Library and campus
      • Take advantage of the administration you have
      • Grow your program locally
      • The process may not look formal
    • Find influential faculty who can advocate for you
  • Develop your culture
    • Cater to any unique constituencies
      • Understand (G 1.5) learners and adjust your teaching
      • Recognize the reality of part-time instructors
    • Listen to the needs of instructors and work with them-- but help guide them
    • Develop the pedagogical skills of librarians
  • Take away for public libraries
    • Cater to your unique constituencies
      • Find the gatekeepers for your particular communities and work with them to develop outreach
      • Partner with K-12 schools—their students are using your library
      • Literature on Millennials is helpful
    • Develop the pedagogical skills of your librarians
      • Reference librarianship is teaching and yours is a teaching library
  • Take away for public libraries
    • Decide as a library how much you can or want to change
      • Hold focus groups for your librarians first
      • Dialog with your influential librarians; allow everyone who wants to to become part of the process
      • Query the community at large and find out what your community needs and wants from the library.
  • Catherine Haras CSU, Los Angeles [email_address]