• Like

Loading…

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

New Models for Credit-Bearing Information Literacy Courses

  • 2,735 views
Published

ACRL e-Learning Webcast, March 15, 2011. (Updated)

ACRL e-Learning Webcast, March 15, 2011. (Updated)

Published in Education
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
2,735
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
40
Comments
0
Likes
3

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide
  • I. About University 106 Taught since 1973 1 credit course From Julia: The first library credit course was offered in Fall 1973 and was for 1 credit. The name of the course was "Special Topics-Library Skills 297." The instructor of the course was Evelyn Everts. We have the workbook from that course here in Special Collections that you're welcome to come by and view. II. Early incarnation (1973-2008) Course title: Library Skills Content delivered on the library website (but still focused on print resources) Self-paced with worksheets that must all be completed correctly to pass (numerous attempts possible) Stand-alone course required for a few majors (Marketing, Radiology) but often taken by seniors just to get an additional credit. 150 student cap, generally full (right?) Pass rate? Course evals?
  • III. Curriculum Update (Spring/Summer 2008) Course retitled: Library Research New course goals and outcomes tied to ACRL Info Lit standards Content update in terms of technology and more conceptual, critical thinking topics Content recreated in Blackboard 150 student cap initially maintained, then dropped to 100 in Fall 2008 First in-person sections added (Fall 2008, 2 sections) Discipline and College oriented sections (Spr 2009) – Honors College, Marketing Pass rates? Course evals? Registration rates?
  • We launched the Project Writing and Research (PoWeR) in spring 2009, which was a pilot program that paired individual University 106 and English 102 courses as corequisites. University 106 was taught fully online and acted as a lab, and Kim and I worked with the English instructors to develop a tailored Univ106 curriculum that supported the research-based writing assignments in the specific English 102 courses we were working with. Kim and I had been teaching stand-alone sections of Univ106 for several semesters and had felt constrained by the scope of a one-credit class. The assignments and activities we assigned were not substantial enough to provide students an opportunity to fully incorporate the information literacy learning outcomes we had established for first-year students. At the same time, English 102 instructors and librarians were looking for new ways to provide enhanced research instruction for English 102 courses – we all wanted to move beyond the one-shot workshops. So pairing with English 102 was a good fit because we had an established relationship with the course and the learning outcomes for both courses were already in alignment.
  • Developing effective PoWeR courses required deep collaboration with the First Year Writing Program. In order to expand our offerings we looked for funding and with the support of a grant we were able to host a series of institutes that paired librarians with English faculty to develop increasingly synchronized syllabi. The grant also supported librarians to develop video tutorials to enhance and streamline our information literacy curriculum. Throughout this process we kept our students in view – each piece of our curriculum (from video tutorials to activities to assignments) was developed with student learning in mind.
  • We’ve published our collaboratively developed curriculum as an E-Textbook that includes our video tutorials. The instructor edition also hosts suggested activities and assessments. At this point in the project we’re using Springshare’s Libguides to publish it.
  • When we asked University 106 students in stand-alone and PoWeR whether THIS COURSE HELPED ME TO DEVELOP THE SKILLS TO SUCCESSFULLY... perform specific tasks, such as evaluating web resources or getting research help, PoWeR students were more likely to agree. So, students are telling us that the PoWeR courses are better helping them to meet the course learning objectives.
  • VI. Upcoming University 106 offeringsContinued PoWeR experimentation Variations in pairings (open sections) PoWeR Institute focused on E-Textbook integration Discipline-specific for required majors
  • Online platform used: Blackboard Other responses have not taught for-credit instruction yet.
  • TARGETED STUDENT GROUPS *First year programs -Nims, J. K., Andrew, A., Eastern Michigan University., & National LOEX Library Instruction Conference. (2002). First impressions, lasting impact: Introducing the first year student to the academic library . Library orientation series, no. 32. Ann Arbor, MI: Published for Learning Resources and Technologies, Eastern Michigan University by Pierian Press. -Sugarman, Tammy S., and Laura G. Burtle. "From 50 Minutes to 15 Weeks: Teaching a Semester-Long Information Literacy Course Within a Freshman Learning Community" Integrating information literacy into the college experience. Pierian Press, 2003. Library Lit & Inf Full Text. Web. 6 July 2010. *Honors -Snavely, L., & Wright, C. (2003). Research Portfolio Use in Undergraduate Honors Education: Assessment Tool and Model for Future Work. The Journal of Academic Librarianship , 29 (5), 298-303. doi: 10.1016/S0099-1333(03)00069-7 *Specific audiences -Bagnole, J., & Miller, J. (2003). An Interactive Information Literacy Course for International Students: A Practical Blueprint for ESL Learners. TESL-EJ, 6(4), Retrieved from ERIC database. TARGETED ACADEMIC PROGRAMS *General disciplines -Stephenson, E., & Caravello, P. (2007). Incorporating data literacy into undergraduate information literacy programs in the social sciences. Reference Services Review, 35(4), 525-540. Retrieved from Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts database. *Academic departments -Durando, P., & Oakley, P. (2005). Developing information literacy skills in nursing and rehabilitation therapy students. Journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association (JCHLA), 26(1), 7-11. Retrieved from Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts database. -Stylianopoulos, L. (2003). It’s All in the Company You Keep: Library Skills Credit Courses in the Art Library. Art Documentation, 22(1), 29-32. Retrieved from Library Lit & Inf Full Text database. *Distance education -Mulherrin, E., Kelley, K., Fishman, D., & Orr, G. (2004). Information Literacy and the Distant Student: One University's Experience Developing, Delivering, and Maintaining an Online, Required Information Literacy Course. Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 9(1/2), 21-36. doi:10.1300/J136v09n01•03. -Scales, J., Matthews, G., & Johnson, C. (2005). Compliance, Cooperation, Collaboration and Information Literacy. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 31(3), 229-235. Retrieved from Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts database. DEPARTMENTAL COLLABORATIONS *Co-requisite and related --Goebel, N., & Neff, P. (2007). INFORMATION LITERACY AT AUGUSTANA. Communications in Information Literacy, 1(1), 6-15. Retrieved from Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts database.
  • *Improved / innovative teaching Frantz, P. (2002). A scenario-based approach to credit course instruction. Reference Services Review, 30(1), 37-42. doi: 10.1108/00907320210416528. Sharma, S. (2007). From Chaos to Clarity: Using the Research Portfolio to Teach and Assess Information Literacy Skills. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 33(1), 127-35. Retrieved from Library Lit & Inf Full Text database. *Assessment Burkhardt, J.M. (2007). Assessing Library Skills: A First Step to Information Literacy. Portal : Libraries and the Academy, 7(1), 25-34,36,44-49. Retrieved July 6, 2010, from ProQuest Central. (Document ID: 1205768831). Pre- and Post- test

Transcript

  • 1. New models for credit bearing information literacy courses ACRL e-learning webcast, November 16, 2010
  • 2. Presenters
    • Kim Leeder : Librarian/Assistant Professor, Boise State University
    • Sara Seely : Librarian/Assistant Professor, Boise State University
    • Christopher Hollister : Associate Librarian, University at Buffalo
  • 3. Welcome!
    • Road map for today’s webinar:
    • Introduction
    • Case Studies: Boise State and U Buffalo
    • Top New Models & Methods
    • Discussion
    Photo by Scorpions and Centaurs http://www.flickr.com/photos/sshb/4087836286//
  • 4. We want to know about you.
    • Please answer the following question using Elluminate’s polling choices below the participant list at left.
    • Are you currently teaching a for-credit information literacy course?
      • Yes: click the green checkmark
      • No: click the red X
  • 5. We want to know about you.
    • Please answer the following question using Elluminate’s polling choices below the participant list at left.
    • How long has your library been teaching a for-credit information literacy course?
      • A: 1-5 years
      • B: 6-10 years
      • C: 11-15 years
      • D: We don’t teach one (yet)
  • 6. We want to know about you.
    • Please answer the following question using Elluminate’s polling choices below the participant list at left.
    • What has been the major change in your library’s for-credit information literacy course over time?
      • A: Content
      • B: Delivery method
      • C: Audience
      • D: All of the above
  • 7. Environment for change
    • Students
      • •    Learning styles
      • •    Expectations
      • •    Information literacy/illiteracy
      • •    Emerging literacy
      • •    Engagement
  • 8. Environment for change (cont.)
    • Institutions
      • •    Accreditation
      • •    Budgets
      • •    Curricula
        • •    General education
        • •    Individual disciplines
  • 9. Environment for change (cont.)
    • Libraries/librarians
      • •    Professional role
      • •    Institutional role
      • •    Staffing/budgets
  • 10. Environment for change (cont.)
    • Technology
      • •    Distance, online, hybrid
      • •    Courseware
      • •    Multimedia
      • •    Web communication tools
      • •    Social software/networking
      • •    Instructional technology
  • 11. We want to hear from you.
    • Please answer the following question using Elluminate’s polling choices below the participant list at left.
    • Which of these factors do you feel has had the most impact on your teaching?
      • A: Students
      • B: Institutions
      • C: Libraries/librarians
      • D: Technology
  • 12. The Boise State experience A microcosm of changes in the library instruction world.
  • 13. University 106: History & Context
    • 1 credit, since 1973, “Library Skills”
    • Originally a paper, self-paced course, was later migrated online as same model
    • “ Get it all right” approach to learning
    • Students
      • Required by a few random majors
      • Seniors needing 1 more credit
      • 150 cap
  • 14. Curriculum update (2008)
    • Course retitled, new focus: “Library Research”
    • Course goals updated, aligned to ACRL standards
    • New approaches
      • Blackboard
      • In-person sections
      • Discipline- and College-oriented sections
    • Increasing collaboration with First Year Writing Program
    Photo by warrenski, http://www.flickr.com/photos/warrenski/5026666309/
  • 15. Project Writing and Research
  • 16. PoWeR = Collaboration
  • 17. PoWeR E-Textbook
  • 18. Portfolio assessment
  • 19. Univ106 Course Evaluations
  • 20. Next steps at BSU
    • Continued PoWeR experimentation
      • Variations in pairings (open sections)
      • PoWeR Institute focused on E-Textbook integration
    • Discipline-specific
      • Health Sciences
      • STEM resources
      • Marketing resources
  • 21. The University at Buffalo experience
  • 22. University at Buffalo
    • ULC 257: Library Research Methods
      • Case study teaching
      • Digital Archive
      • Credit course for Dept. of Physics
      • Moodle
  • 23. The Webcast participant experience What you told us in the pre-webcast survey.
  • 24. IL courses at your institutions
    • Delivery method
    # Answer % 1 In person. 63% 2 Online. 25% 3 Hybrid. 25% 4 Other: 38%
  • 25. Collaborations reported
    • General Education committee
    • Tutoring/LD services
    • None
    • Schools of Education and Music
    • Math Computer Science department
    • Department of English
  • 26. Student audience targeted
    • Transfer students
    • Freshmen
    • undergraduates--gen ed
    • junior and senior students who may be working on their senior papers (a requirement for graduation)
    • freshmen and sophomores (although there is no requirement that it be taken in the first two years)
  • 27. Assessment strategies
    • Pre- and post- surveys or exams
    • evaluation of student work
    • student evaluations or other direct student feedback
  • 28. Description/unique aspects
    • One-credit course for transfer students
    • addresses the differences between HS expectations and college-level work (with IL component)
    • required Core course
    • much of the content is developed by librarians, but administered by the Math Computer Science department.
    • Serves 2,000 students each year (65 sections)
    • 8 weeks, 1 credit
    • Required by approximately half of the University’s majors as part of their curriculum.
  • 29. New models and methods A literature review and case studies.
  • 30. Differentiated instruction
    • Targeted student groups
      • First year programs
      • Honors
      • Other targeted audiences
    • Targeted academic programs
      • General disciplines
      • Academic departments
      • Distance education
    • Departmental collaborations
      • Co-requisite and related arrangements
  • 31. New methods
    • Improved/innovative teaching
      • Learning theory
      • Active learning
      • Case study teaching
    • Assessment
    • Portfolio structure
    • Technology
  • 32. Challenges
    • Scalability
      • Staffing
      • Budgets
      • Technology
      • Support
      • Continuing education/improvement
  • 33. Discussion
    • How to put yourself in a breakout room (click and drag your name)
    • Whiteboard lesson (try it!)
      • Whiteboard toolbar >>>
      • Click the right-hand “A” icon and then click whiteboard to type in a scrolling box
  • 34. Discuss!
    • Breakout rooms
      • Choose a model that interests you and, when prompted, drag your name and drop in that room.
      • After 15 mins we’ll automatically return everyone to the main room.
    • Breakout Room Task: 1. What are the benefits of this model? 2. What are the challenges of this model? 3. What are 2 or 3 possible strategies for addressing the challenges you identified?
    • Take notes on your whiteboard to share with the whole group afterwards.
  • 35. The end
    • Thank you!
  • 36. Selected Bibliography
    • ALL AREAS OF THE CREDIT IL COURSE
    • Hollister, Christopher, ed. Best Practices for Credit-Bearing Information Literacy Courses . (Chicago: Association of College & Research Libraries, 2010).
    • TARGETED STUDENT GROUPS
    • Bagnole, J., & Miller, J. (2003). An Interactive Information Literacy Course for International Students: A Practical Blueprint for ESL Learners. TESL-EJ, 6(4), Retrieved from ERIC database.
    • Nims, J. K., Andrew, A., Eastern Michigan University., & National LOEX Library Instruction Conference. (2002). First impressions, lasting impact: Introducing the first year student to the academic library . Library orientation series, no. 32. Ann Arbor, MI: Published for Learning Resources and Technologies, Eastern Michigan University by Pierian Press.
    • Snavely, L., & Wright, C. (2003). Research Portfolio Use in Undergraduate Honors Education: Assessment Tool and Model for Future Work. The Journal of Academic Librarianship , 29 (5), 298-303. doi: 10.1016/S0099-1333(03)00069-7
    • Sugarman, Tammy S., and Laura G. Burtle. "From 50 Minutes to 15 Weeks: Teaching a Semester-Long Information Literacy Course Within a Freshman Learning Community" Integrating information literacy into the college experience. Pierian Press, 2003. Library Lit & Inf Full Text. Web. 6 July 2010.
    •   TARGETED ACADEMIC PROGRAMS
    • Durando, P., & Oakley, P. (2005). Developing information literacy skills in nursing and rehabilitation therapy students. Journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association (JCHLA), 26(1), 7-11. Retrieved from Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts database.
    • Mulherrin, E., Kelley, K., Fishman, D., & Orr, G. (2004). Information Literacy and the Distant Student: One University's Experience Developing, Delivering, and Maintaining an Online, Required Information Literacy Course. Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 9(1/2), 21-36. doi:10.1300/J136v09n01•03.
    • Scales, J., Matthews, G., & Johnson, C. (2005). Compliance, Cooperation, Collaboration and Information Literacy. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 31(3), 229-235. Retrieved from Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts database.
    • Stephenson, E., & Caravello, P. (2007). Incorporating data literacy into undergraduate information literacy programs in the social sciences. Reference Services Review, 35(4), 525-540. Retrieved from Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts database.
    • Stylianopoulos, L. (2003). It’s All in the Company You Keep: Library Skills Credit Courses in the Art Library. Art Documentation, 22(1), 29-32. Retrieved from Library Lit & Inf Full Text database.
  • 37. Selected Bibliography
    • DEPARTMENTAL COLLABORATIONS
    • Goebel, N., & Neff, P. (2007). INFORMATION LITERACY AT AUGUSTANA. Communications in Information Literacy, 1(1), 6-15. Retrieved from Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts database.
    • IMPROVED / INNOVATIVE TEACHING
    • Allen, M. (2008). Promoting Critical Thinking Skills in Online Information Literacy Instruction Using a Constructivist Approach. College & Undergraduate Libraries , 15 (1/2), 21-38. doi:10.1080/10691310802176780.
    • Frantz, P. (2002). A scenario-based approach to credit course instruction. Reference Services Review, 30(1), 37-42. doi: 10.1108/00907320210416528.
    • Hegarty, N., Carbery, A., & Hurley, T. (2009). Learning by Doing: Re-designing the First Year Information Literacy Programme at Waterford Institute of Technology (WIT) Libraries. Journal of Information Literacy , 3 (2), 73-87. Retrieved from Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts database.
    • Hollister, C. Making the Case for Enhanced Learning: Using Case Studies in a Credit-Bearing Library Course. In E. Connor (Ed.), An Introduction to Instructional Services in Academic Libraries (pp. 95-105). New York: Haworth.
    • Johnson, W. (2007). The Application of Learning Theory to Information Literacy. College & Undergraduate Libraries , 14 (4), 103-120. doi:10.1080/10691310802128435.
    • Sharma, S. (2007). From Chaos to Clarity: Using the Research Portfolio to Teach and Assess Information Literacy Skills. Journal of Academic Librarianship , 33(1), 127-35. Retrieved from Library Lit & Inf Full Text database.
    • Williams, J., & Chinn, S. (2009). Using Web 2.0 to Support the Active Learning Experience. Journal of Information Systems Education , 20 (2), 165-174. Retrieved from Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts database.
    • ASSESSMENT
    • Burkhardt, J.M. (2007). Assessing Library Skills: A First Step to Information Literacy. Portal : Libraries and the Academy, 7(1), 25-34,36,44-49. Retrieved July 6, 2010, from ProQuest Central. (Document ID: 1205768831).
    • Oakleaf, M. (2009). The information literacy instruction assessment cycle: A guide for increasing student learning and improving librarian instructional skills. Journal of Documentation , 65 (4), 539-560. Retrieved from Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts database.
  • 38. Selected Bibliography
    • PORTFOLIO STRUCTURE
    • Walsh, T. & Hollister, C. (2009). Creating a Digital Archive for Students' Research in a Credit Library Course. Reference & User Services Quarterly 48 (4), 391-400.
    • TECHNOLOGY
    • Burkhardt, J., Kinnie, J., & Cournoyer, C. (2008). Information Literacy Successes Compared: Online vs. Face to Face. Journal of Library Administration, 48(3/4), 379-389.
    • Chen, H., & Williams, J. (2009). Pedagogical Design for an Online Information Literacy Course: College Students' Learning Experience with Multi-Modal Objects. Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science, 33(1/2), 1-37. Retrieved from Library Lit & Inf Full Text database.
    • Chen, H., & Williams, J. (2009). Use of multi-modal media and tools in an online information literacy course: College students' attitudes and perceptions. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 35(1), 14-24.
    • Jacobs, W. (2007). Online Discussion in a Hybrid Information Literacy Credit Course. Education Libraries, 30(2), 18-26.