Oregon IL Summit 2017

Register now for the 11th annual ILAGO Information Literacy Summit held May 13, 2017 at Washington State University, Vancouver.

We will meet in the Dengerink Administration Building, rooms 129/130 on the WSU Vancouver campus. The closest parking lot is the Orange 2 lot, and parking is free.

Campus map: https://www.vancouver.wsu.edu/sites/www.vancouver.wsu.edu/files/wsuv_campusmap.pdf

Check-in starts at 8:30, and we’ll have a continental breakfast with pastries and coffee until 9:00. 

Cost: $30, which includes continental breakfast and a buffet-style lunch.

Registration: http://olaweb.org/il-summit-registration-2017

Schedule:

8:30 – 9:00      Check in/Coffee/Refreshments

9:00 – 9:30       Welcome – Sarah Ralston, ILAGO .
                           Greeting — Karen Diller, WSUV Library Director.
                           OWEAC Update – Kate Sullivan, Lane Community College.

9:30 – 10:20     Morning Panel Session

  • Metacognitive Information Literacy Assessment: The Strengths, Scope and Opportunities in a Shared Self-Assessment – Sara Robertson, Portland Community College; Kirsten Hostetler, Central Oregon Community College; Kim Olson-Charles, Concordia University; Jackie Ray, Blue Mountain Community College; Candice Watkins, Tacoma Community College; Michele Burke, Chemeketa Community College.

The ILAGO MILA Project Group will give an update on their work and offer an opportunity for conversation. MILA is Metacognitive Information Literacy Assessment, and ILAGO established the MILA group to investigate the relationship between metacognition and information literacy, and to development a self-assessment of information literacy strategies inspired by the MARSI tool. The group will introduce the MARSI tool, and present findings of a literature review on metacognition, self-assessments, and information literacy learning.

10:20 – 10:30   Break

10:30 – 11:30     Presentations

  • Geek out, Don’t Freak Out: How to Chill Out and Learn to Love AssessmentMeredith Farkas, Portland Community College; Colleen Sanders, Clackamas Community College
    Assessment is such a valuable tool to help learn more about our patrons, demonstrate the value of what we do, and improve our teaching. So why is it so difficult to build an assessment culture in library instruction programs? Often, resistance to and anxiety about assessment come from common causes that have been both discussed in the literature and illustrated in our own experiences. Meredith and Colleen will talk about their experiences working with nascent assessment programs at their libraries, the projects they’ve worked on, and what they’ve learned from trial and sometimes error. They will discuss ways that librarians can move past resistance and anxiety to reap the benefits of an assessment culture.

Librarians have goals of reaching our students and engaging them with our instruction. Some of us even write it into our library assessment outcomes: “Provide engaging classroom and online instruction, which helps students develop their information competence skills.” But how do we know if we’ve engaged our students? How do we know if our students are motivated?

This last fall, a librarian surveyed students in Writing 121 classes to gather information and find out how well librarians are meeting this goal of student engagement with library instruction. The survey used questions from the Course Interest Survey based on John Keller’s ARCS Model of Motivation (Attention, Relevance, Confidence, and Satisfaction), with two questions for each category.

This presentation will review the assessment process and the differences between assessing student motivation and student learning. It will also discuss the results and the library’s future assessment plans for information literacy.

Fake news is not new, but it is timely, and a terrific opportunity for us to flex our media literacy muscles. Get connected with resources that can help us battle fake news and plan your next lesson!

11:35 – 12:35      Presentations

One of the practical challenges presented by ACRL’s Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education is how to use it to design and assess instruction. By its nature, the framework is less prescriptive and more descriptive; it is more focused on understandings, habits, and general behaviors than on specific skills and practices, which makes it harder to pin down for purposes of instructional design.

This workshop will introduce a tool for teaching librarians that arose out of Linfield College Library’s efforts to update the student learning outcomes for its information literacy program: The SLOFrame Grid. Though the tool is still being developed, librarians at Linfield have found in their initial work with the grid that it allows them to see the connections between learning outcomes for their teaching sessions and the Frames with greater visual and intuitive clarity, and that it has the potential to support teachers in using the Frames as lenses through which to focus their information literacy instruction.

Participants will be introduced to the grid, will practice some different ways of using it, and will be given the opportunity to discuss the grid’s use and to brainstorm other possible uses.

In October 2016, OWEAC finalized revised outcomes for courses in the foundational writing sequence (i.e., WR 115, WR 121, WR 122). Many of us support research in WR 121 and WR 122 and these classes or their equivalent are required in the AAOT Degree. “Oh, my” indeed! In this session, we will overview the revised outcomes and think about implications for research instruction. The revised outcomes reflect an expectation that students will develop metacognitive awareness; we will call out similarities to the ACRL Framework for Information Literacy in Higher Ed. We will highlight significant changes, such as the explicit presence of multimodal projects and composition. Teaching and assessing writing is messy, and OWEAC has embraced that messy complexity. What does that look like in the outcomes and what does it mean for librarians? We will talk about next steps in the process of implementing the revised outcomes, and start the conversation around how the changes might impact research and librarian instruction.

This session will be particularly helpful for community college librarians and their four-year partners, as well as High School faculty and others interested in curriculum alignment.

In the current educational climate, the academic library has emerged as the focal point of the college experience and the center of student engagement. Given the changes in the economics and politics of higher education, questions of assessment arise along with the need to document and articulate the value of libraries and their contribution to institutional mission and goals in order to re-examine how and what they offer to learners and ultimately sustain their relevance in the digital age.

This presentation focuses on two perspectives through which library accountability and value can be demonstrated. First, it examines the effect of subject-specific information literacy instruction on student success through the lens of the Eastern Washington University library offerings to the College of Social Sciences. It shows how assessment data can illuminate the importance of aligning instructional content with student learning outcomes for designing unconventional instructional practices that better impact student learning.

The second perspective underscores the pressing need to expand the value conversation beyond assessing library influence on student learning alone. We also need to examine the library influence in terms of supporting faculty research. The main take-away for the participants is that a holistic vision of the library value is only possible when we evaluate its impact on all constituencies. Pro-active and well-planned subject specialist liaison work between a library and academic units is an effective vehicle to achieve this goal, as the example of the University of Northern Colorado Libraries testifies.

12:35 – 1:30       Lunch

1:35 – 2:35       Afternoon Work Sessions

  • MILA Shared Self-Assessment Work Session – The ILAGO MILA Project Group will host an interactive work session so participants can offer insights, help give direction to the development of a statewide and open source assessment tool, and think about local applications of metacognitive assessment.

 

  • Shiny Happy Assessment: Using Logic Models in Library Assessment – M. Brooke Robertshaw, Oregon State University

The objective of this workshop is to introduce logic models and how they can be used in library assessment. This hour long work session will go over the basic parts of a logic model and participants will be encouraged to work through an assessment that they are thinking about undertaking.  Participants will be guided through defining the problem, identifying what they need to know, who they need to ask, and an overview of methods they can use. We will finish with how to use this information to talk about the results, and how to identify the audience of their shiny new assessment solutions.

2:45-3:45      Plenary Session

Critical Information Literacy Assessment – Anne Downey, Reed College

Critical information literacy (CIL) is exciting and enticing librarians across higher education, but questions about how to authentically practice it continue to challenge us. CIL is rooted in critical pedagogy, which some teachers find difficult to assess. However, authentic assessment is an essential component of teaching with critical pedagogical methods. Attendees of this presentation will learn the basics of CIL, why assessment matters, and methods to meaningfully assess critical information literacy sessions.

3:50 – 4:15       Wrap  up

Advertisements
https://ilago.wordpress.com/oregon-il-summit-2017/
ilago.wordpress.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2019-13
47950
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:CZH44OIYMY4DH5M4GHO5GUAJR2HU4KTD
<urn:uuid:08405ea6-004f-43eb-90d7-a6a12c5ddabe>
2019-03-23T13:11:45Z
192.0.78.13
text/html
sha1:2SYPGR7UF7EPSZ6ZUUPXTKZWPKGPGUJS
<urn:uuid:d067fd3c-8f16-4b96-8e0f-dc5fe88fe079>
https://ilago.wordpress.com/oregon-il-summit-2017/
response
<urn:uuid:ac6c181e-00cd-4773-b4c4-4cbf77be66b9>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2019-13
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for March 2019
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-69-221-252.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.15 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 0.11-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: http://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/