Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
A Gateway to Outcomes Assessment: Collaborating on a Multi-Session Library Instruction Program
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.


Saving this for later?

Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime - even offline.

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

A Gateway to Outcomes Assessment: Collaborating on a Multi-Session Library Instruction Program


Published on

Published in: Education, Technology

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide


  • 1. A Gateway to Outcomes Assessment Collaborating on a Multi-Session Library Instruction Program Jenny Hatleberg Niyati Pandya Montgomery College, MD
  • 2. Overview  Introduction: Montgomery College & Gateway to College  Gateway to College – Library Collaboration  Outcomes Assessment  Challenges & Lessons Learned  Looking Ahead
  • 3. Montgomery College -Gateway toCollege ege
  • 4. Gateway to College Students Age 16-21 High School GPA 1.6- 2.0 No. of High School Credits No more than 17 credits Reading/English Proficiency Tenth grade  Challenge: Classroom management
  • 5. Gateway to College Program Model  Foundation Term Reading & Writing Math College Survival & Success Library Sessions Career Development Academic Seminars & Application Accuplacer Assessment Transition Term Transition to college classes College classes for HS requirements REPEAT, REPEAT, REPEAT HS Diploma + College credits earned
  • 6. Gateway-Library Collaboration Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Research & Service Learning Seminar 10AM-12PM College Success Reading College Success & Reading & Career 1-2:15PM Career Develop’t 1-2:15PM Develop’t 1 – 2:15 PM 1 – 2:15 PM Math Writing Math Writing 2:30 – 4:15 PM 2:30 – 3:4 5PM 2:30 – 4:15 PM 2:30 – 3:45PM Language Arts Seminar Math Apps 4:15 – 5:45 PM 4:45-6:15 PM
  • 7. Gateway-Library Collaboration• Summer 2010• Gateway Program Director Instruction Librarians Instruction Librarians (3) Research & Reading/Writing Service Learning Faculty (2) Seminar Instructors (3)
  • 8. Gateway-Library Collaboration Planning Process 1. Met Summer 2010 for initial planning 2. Identified IL skills that would be needed to complete Reading/Writing assignments 3. Developed Library Sessions based on IL skills; used ACRL Information Literacy Standards as student learning outcomes • Information Literacy Student Learning Outcomes for each session • Challenges: Coordinating across campuses
  • 9. Learning Tools• Library Course Page:
  • 10. Learning Tools• Blackboard • Librarian Role created in Spring 2012
  • 11. Session Topics & Learning Outcomes1. Finding Primary & Secondary Sources2. Evaluating Websites & Doing Exploratory Research3. Evaluating Scholarly Information4. Developing Search Strategies & Doing Historical Research5. Review and Individual Research for Final Papers Challenge: Strengthening connection between Library sessions and Reading/Writing classes
  • 12. Outcomes Assessment• Performance-based assessment activities • Provided active learning experience • Enabled us to evaluate student learning• Student Learning Outcomes determined design of activities o Examples:  Evaluating websites  Keyword Searching• Informal games, feedback forms, and reflection papers• Challenges: Time, coordination, etc.
  • 13. Outcomes AssessmentEvaluating Websites• Learning Outcome: Examine and compare information from various sources in order to evaluate reliability, validity, accuracy, authority, timeliness, and point of view or bias• Used videos to introduce why to evaluate, as well as criteria. Viewed sample websites as class.• Online Activity: Choosing Good Sources
  • 14. Choosing Good Sources
  • 15. Rubric: Choosing Good Sources Very Good (2 pts) Adequate (1 pt) Poor (0 pts) Evaluate Articulates one Articulates a Does not articulate reliability based reason why this reason why this any reason why on CAPOW: would or would not would or would not this would or currency, be a reliable be a reliable would not be a authority, source, giving source, but reliable source purpose, examples based example is objectivity, and on criteria unrelated to the writing style discussed in class criteria discussed in class Identify CAPOW Correctly identifies Identifies a reason Does not identify a criteria: one of the five that relates to the criteria; criteria currency, CAPOW criteria five criteria, but identified does not authority, as a justification does not use the relate to what was purpose, for choice criteria covered in covered in class objectivity, class writing style
  • 16. Outcomes AssessmentKeyword Searching• Learning Outcomes: • Identify keywords, synonyms and related terms for the information needed • Construct a search strategy using appropriate Boolean operators for the information retrieval system selected• Break process down into steps, using active learning activities for each • “fuzzy words” • Simon Says• Online Activity: Searching for Articles
  • 17. Searching for Articles
  • 18. Searching for Articles
  • 19. Searching for Articles
  • 20. Outcomes AssessmentClosing the loop• Revised to improve assessment tools• Adapted session outlines to clarify content• Challenges: Continuous revision
  • 21. Searching for Articles
  • 22. Looking Ahead• Develop outcomes assessment plans for other parts of our IL instruction program.• Transferability of information literacy skills = opportunity to use assessment tools in other classes• Building a toolbox of active learning activities
  • 23. Questions? niyati.pandya@montgomerycollege.edujennifer.hatleberg@montgomerycollege.ed u