Collaborating librarian acrl 2011 handout


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

Collaborating librarian acrl 2011 handout

  1. 1. The Collaborating Librarian:<br />Partnering Across Campus to Assist Assessment Efforts<br />ACRL Poster Session -- 2011<br />Beth L. Mark<br />Beth M. Transue<br />Messiah College<br />Grantham, PA<br />Background:<br />We became collaborating librarians and campus stakeholders through initiating projects that simultaneously assisted assessment efforts across our campus (2800 FTE undergraduates). We cultivated partnerships, coordinated the projects, and presented the results to our partners: the Provost, Academic Policy Committee, schools, and academic departments.<br />Previous Assessment Efforts<br /><ul><li>Library competency test for first year students (administered yearly following library instruction sessions in First Year Seminar classes). Collaboration partners: First Year Seminar faculty and with General Education Committee.
  2. 2. Assessment of First Year Seminar papers (content and bibliographies). Collaboration partners: General Education Committee.
  3. 3. Assessment of honors and other departmental papers (bibliographies). Collaboration partners academic departments.</li></ul>Campus-Wide Assessment Projects<br />Phase I: Syllabi Analysis Project <br />Meeting with Provost<br /><ul><li>Provost was interested in budget and library resources usage
  4. 4. Enthusiastic about the project
  5. 5. Granted us access to the syllabi database (only). We could not directly contact faculty.
  6. 6. Provost and Assistant Provost asked us to extract data of interest to their office. This was expanded to other campus groups (Writing Center, Learning Center, Disabilities Office)</li></ul>Syllabi Analysis Oveview<br /><ul><li>Objectives:
  7. 7. Evidence of information literacy in library-related assignments
  8. 8. Collection development data (types of resources required)
  9. 9. Data for other offices and department
  10. 10. Method: Accessed all 2007/2008 syllabi in campus database, extracting a range of data.
  11. 11. Findings from 1401 syllabi (2007-2008):
  12. 12. 19050071755
  13. 13. Findings for Provost and Other Offices
  14. 14. 96% included course objectives
  15. 15. 44% included academic integrity policy
  16. 16. 69% included ADA or college disabilities statement
  17. 17. 64% included some kind of grading scale
  18. 18. .3% required use of Writing Center; 9% recommended it
  19. 19. .1% required use of Learning Center; 8% recommended it
  20. 20. Library – What We Looked for
  21. 21. Library and library instruction
  22. 22. Information literacy
  23. 23. Reserves
  24. 24. Websites and Databases
  25. 25. Citation styles
  26. 26. What we Found about Library Usage
  27. 27. Syllabi were not adequate for complete assignment or collection development information.
  28. 28. Solution
  29. 29. Collect separate assignment information
  30. 30. Unplanned Benefits
  31. 31. Appreciation of Provost and other administrators
  32. 32. Request to present data to Academic Council
  33. 33. Subsequently, presented to two Schools
  34. 34. Raised visibility of librarians as campus stakeholders in assessment
  35. 35. Prepared the way for expanded project (assignment analysis)</li></ul>Phase II: Library Assignment Analysis Project (2009-2010)<br /><ul><li>Meeting with the Provost – Take II
  36. 36. Provost approved the library assignment collection project
  37. 37. Asked us to present the proposal to school deans for their buy-in and for them to be the communication channel to department chairs
  38. 38. Meeting with School Deans, Spring 2009
  39. 39. Deans agreed that the project had value
  40. 40. Recommended time line and changes in wording of memo prepared for faculty
  41. 41. Agreed to communicate the project, with a time line, to department chairs
  42. 42. Process
  43. 43. One dean suggested creating a form that faculty could fill out in lieu of submitting written assignment directions (librarians created forms for each department – see Appendix below for example).
  44. 44. September 2009, Deans asked department chairs to send the request for assignment information to their faculty (for AY 2010)
  45. 45. About half of the departments submitted assignments by spring 2010
  46. 46. With follow up reminders, the total return was good
  47. 47. Extracted library reserve data by course
  48. 48. Summer, 2010, data entered by students
  49. 49. Results (see following tables)
  50. 50. What we Learned from the Assignment Assessment Project
  51. 51. In cases where forms only were submitted, some narrative information that would have benefitted the librarians was lost
  52. 52. However, the forms provided information that was not included in some written assignments
  53. 53. Individual follow up provided opportunities to raise awareness of faculty regarding unknown library resources
  54. 54. What we envision
  55. 55. Will use data to demonstrate use (or not) of library resources for class assignments
  56. 56. Will provide liaison librarians with a good picture of what their department faculty are assigning – possible opportunity for discussion of information literacy and collection development
  57. 57. Will continue to be invited to the table as a campus stakeholder</li></ul>Becoming a Stakeholder – A Snapshot<br /> “[The Provost] was quite taken with your preliminary report. Is it alright with you if he shows it to others? He would also like to invite the two of you to present at a future Academic Council meeting. … Messiah’s syllabus policy will be on the agenda this spring and he thinks your work is highly relevant to that discussion.”<br />Appendix<br />Library Assignment Collection Project Checklist – History<br />NOTE: You may submit an assignment description that you have already created OR complete one of these checklists each assignment which calls for use of library resources, either within the library or remotely (e.g., use of Library databases, etc.)<br />Course name ____________________________________ Course number_______Assignment name ________________________________  [e.g., paper on .....]Project type:  __ paper  <br />__ speech  <br />__ multi-media presentation <br />__ other (please describe):_____________________________________<br />Do you require books? Yes___ No___ Number of books required (if specified)___   Do you require journal articles? Yes___ No___ Number of articles (if specified) ___ <br />Are websites allowed as a resource?  Yes___  No___<br />Other resource required? Please specify _______________________________________<br />Approx. total number of sources expected/required____ If a paper, approx. number of pages expected/required ____<br />If a bibliography, approx. how many items? ____Specific databases required/recommended?  Yes__   No__<br />If yes, which databases?___ Access Newspaper Archive<br />___ America: History & Life<br />___ Asia Studies Humanities<br />___ Asia Studies Full-Text Online <br />___ Early American Imprints (Evans)<br />___ Early American Imprints (Shaw-Shoemaker)<br />___ Early American Newspapers<br />___ History Reference Center<br />___ Historic Documents<br />___ Historical Abstracts<br />___ JSTOR<br />___ WorldCat (books)<br />___ Other: ____________________________ <br />Other comments __________________________________________________________<br />Contact information<br />Beth L. Mark, Instruction Coordinator, bmark@messiah.eud<br />Beth M. Transue, Collection Development Coordinator,<br />