Se ha denunciado esta presentación.
Se está descargando tu SlideShare. ×

Council of Chief Librarians Survey Results & Executive Summary

Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
  	
   Page 1 of 32	
  
Council of Chief Librarians Information Literacy Survey Analysis
Executive Summary, Prepared by Dr...
  	
   Page 2 of 32	
  
Accessing Information and the fact that more libraries have created outcomes for them may
be due t...
  	
   Page 3 of 32	
  
For “Hot Topics”, the most cited concept is Open Educational Resources. Clearly CCC
librarians vie...
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Cargando en…3
×

Eche un vistazo a continuación

1 de 32 Anuncio

Más Contenido Relacionado

Presentaciones para usted (20)

Similares a Council of Chief Librarians Survey Results & Executive Summary (20)

Anuncio

Más reciente (20)

Anuncio

Council of Chief Librarians Survey Results & Executive Summary

  1. 1.     Page 1 of 32   Council of Chief Librarians Information Literacy Survey Analysis Executive Summary, Prepared by Dr. Scott Lee - February, 2016 Description This report provides an analysis of surveys administered to California Community College librarians by the Council of Chief Librarians. The first was an online survey administered between May, 2014 and May, 2015. The second was a “Think Sheet” administered during the CCL Regional Meeting of April, 2015. This summary covers important trends identified in both surveys. Participants The online survey had 26 participants and the “Think Sheet” had 29 participants. For the online survey, participants represented at least 22 different colleges (four participants did not identify their college due to technical problems with the collection form). The Think Sheet did not identify which colleges were participating or if there were multiple participants from the same school. Student Learning Outcomes SLO’s were an important topic in both surveys. Most participants used SLO’s for workshops (54%) and credit courses (25%). Seventeen percent also used them for reference service; however, the surveys did not seek additional detail on this. For courses, type of delivery (online, classroom, hybrid) did not affect the outcomes. A collection of outcomes was submitted and their content was analyzed. This analysis was then compared to the ACRL’s Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education. When placing the outcomes within the six aspects of the Standards, the most covered aspect was Accessing Information Effectively and Efficiently. Almost half of all outcomes submitted (45%) covered this aspect of the Standards. Is this indicative of a lack of depth in SLO’s used by CCC libraries, or are the access tools themselves so complex that they require this much attention and focus? Additionally, the aspect covered the least was incorporating IL into one’s knowledge base, with only 2% of submitted SLO’s covering this. This raises a question of whether this skill is not being taught in IL education programs or, if it is, not being assessed. Librarians may be teaching it but are unsure how to assess it, as it can be complex. Given the role of such a concept to a liberal arts education, however, it should not be ignored. In examining the other submitted outcomes, the second and third most covered aspects of the ACRL’s IL Standard is Information Ethics and Evaluation. Both are more complex than
  2. 2.     Page 2 of 32   Accessing Information and the fact that more libraries have created outcomes for them may be due to the wide availability of previously existing teaching resources. Learning Objectives Most participants (35%) used library Learning Outcomes (including SLO’s, PLO’s, and ILO’s) as the primary tool for developing Learning Objectives followed by standards developed by their districts (26%). The third most cited resource used to develop Learning Objectives was the ACRL’s IL Standards (24%). Given how many CCC librarians are relying on the Standards to develop their objectives, a significant question for the near and distant future is how the ACRL’s change to the IL Framework will affect the development of both objectives and outcomes. Regarding the assessment of Learning Objectives, almost half (48%) used surveys of students, faculty and others as an assessment tool. Surveys are a form of indirect learning assessment. Indirect assessments are an easily deployed, though not highly regarded, learning assessment method. This raises the question of what other types of assessments could be used instead to get a more complete picture of student learning in CCC libraries. Quizzes, assignments and exams were the next most used forms of assessments at twenty- eight percent. Additional Topics From Regional Meeting Most CCC libraries made use of Student Equity funding to purchase textbook reserves or did not use Equity funding at all (19% of participants discussed each). For the Professional Development submissions, while there was no overriding topic, of those with multiple mentions, funding advocacy was one. When looking at these two sets of responses, it could indicate need for training on how to apply for and maximize non-traditional funding sources such as Student Equity. Such training may be even more valuable in the future as these types of funding sources are becoming more important and more common. Participants also asked for training on statistical analysis, teaching practices, using the new ACRL IL Framework and outcomes. Statistics and outcomes clearly have a connection to finding better ways to analyze library performance and demonstrate value to the larger institution, in addition to assessing student learning. These topics are likely to become more important for libraries as CCC’s rely on them so heavily for decision making. Specific to Professional Development, over half (52%) use workshops as their main form of PD. CCL and Info People were the primary sponsors of workshops mentioned, although there were also mentions of workshops by ACRL, ALA, CARL, CLA and Internet Librarian.
  3. 3.     Page 3 of 32   For “Hot Topics”, the most cited concept is Open Educational Resources. Clearly CCC librarians view this as important for future services and it likely has connections to the focus on using Student Equity funds for textbook reserve. Recommendations 1) Based on the importance of the ACRL Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education to CCC libraries, the CCL should provide training on the new ACRL Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education with an emphasis on how to translate policies and practices developed from the Standards into the Framework. 2) A deeper examination (survey, workshop, etc.) of CCC libraries’ outcomes and assessment practices should be undertaken to identify whether they are matching the best type of assessments (direct, indirect, user satisfaction, etc.) to the type of outcomes being assessed (student learning, operational, administrative). This should also cover the depth and variety of Information Literacy concepts being covered and could be part of a large training program on assessment in CCC libraries of both student learning and library performance. 3) The CCL should continue to offer training specific to applying for different forms of funding (Student Equity, Basic Skills, etc.) with an emphasis on rules, limits and the application processes.
  4. 4.     Page 4 of 32   California Community College Information Literacy Survey Analysis This report is a summary and analysis of data from two sources. First is the Online Survey on Information Literacy conducted 6/2014- 4/2015 (Appendix A). This survey was created, distributed, and collected by the CCL Information Literacy Advisory Committee (for membership see Appendix B). The second data source is information from a "Think Sheet" completed by librarians at the Council of Chief Librarians’ Deans and Directors Meeting in April, 2015 (Appendix C). Analysis by Dr. Scott Lee, Antelope Valley College. New Question Numbering 1) Library Name & Contact Information 2) How does your library identify the learning objectives for information literacy instruction? 3) Does your library have standards or best practices for creating learning objectives? 4) Information literacy course content (please provide a link or upload any documents to our shared folder). 5) Does your library instruction use rubrics or other instruments for measuring information literacy instruction? 6) How does your library use rubrics for instruction? 7) Information literacy rubrics (please provide a link or upload any documents to our shared folder). 8) How do you assess your learning objectives for your IL instruction? 9) Student learning outcomes for IL instruction (please check all that apply). 10) SLO’s for credit courses (Please share any SLO’s you have for your credit courses. Please indicate if the course is online, hybrid or in person and if the SLO’s change due to method of delivery). 11) SLO’s for non-credit IL instruction (please share any SLO’s for your non-credit instruction, especially for those that are delivered virtually). 12) Changes made to IL instruction on SLO results (please share any instances where you changed your IL instruction because of SLO results). 13) Information literacy SLO’s or assessments (please provide a link or upload any documents to our shared folder). Breakdown of Participants Number of participants: 26. One non-CA college was removed from the data set. Number of unknown participants: 4. Did not provide college name or other identifying information. Percent of all CCC’s responding: 22%.
  5. 5.     Page 5 of 32   CCC CCC Region Antelope Valley College 6 Cabrillo College 4 Cerro Coso 9 City College of San Francisco 3 College of Alameda 3 College of Marin 3 College of the Canyons 6 Cypress College 8 DeAnza College 4 East Los Angeles College 7 Foothill College 4 Glendale Community College 7 Los Angeles Harbor College 7 Mira Costa College 5 Mt San Jacinto College 9 Napa Valley 2 Palomar College 10 Porterville College 5 San Joaquin Delta College 5 San Jose City College 4 Skyline College 3 West Valley-Mission College 4 Question #2: How does your library identify the learning objectives for information literacy instruction. Concept Analysis of Comments (12 Participants Submitted Information) Concepts Most Frequently Identified: Notes: 1)Some respondents were discussing learning outcomes more than - or instead of - learning objectives. Information for both is included in these counts. 2)The term ‘workshops’ is used to identify library instruction sessions for other discipline courses. It is used instead of ‘one-shots’, ‘sessions’, ‘BI's’, or other terms. Frequency Concept 4 Use ACRL Standards 3 Use ILO's 3 Use PLO's 3 Use SLO's
  6. 6.     Page 6 of 32   1 Assessment Results 1 Assignment Specific 1 Based on Review of SLO's 1 Based on Student Need 1 Based on University Courses 1 Course Specific 1 Discussion (Librarians Only) 1 Discussion (Other Faculty) 1 Document Review 1 Don't Use Learning Objectives 1 Workshop Specific 1 Info Lit Learning Outcomes 1 National Standards Question #3: Does your library have standards or best practices for creating learning objectives? Yes No 14 (58%) 10 (42%) Concept Analysis (19 Participants Submitted Information) Concepts Most Frequently Identified: Frequency Concept 5 Use College Guidelines 5 Use Outside Standards (ACRL, ACCJC, Others) 3 Tailor to Instruction 2 Discussion & Consensus Among Librarians 2 Make Them Measurable 1 Coordinate with Learning Outcomes 1 Have IL as an Institutional-level Outcome 1 Have Library Representation on Outcomes Committee 1 Keep Few in Number 1 Make Clear to Students 1 Make Relevant 1 Partner With Classroom Faculty
  7. 7.     Page 7 of 32   Comments: Keep them few, relevant, and measurable. Ideally, partner in the assessment with faculty from disciplines assigning research projects. I do refer to best practices and standards from ACCJC, ACRL, and others. The college has guidelines for outcomes and assessments and I follow those. We follow the guidelines provided by our Learning Assessment Coordinator we have three CLOs for each course. During the fall semester our instruction librarians will revise and convert the CLOs into one concise CLO through consensus. the Chair for the SLO Committee recently requested and got a library representative onto the committee via the Academic Senate. Discuss with all librarians, draft and redraft, discuss results and revise assignment and measurement tool as needed. We treat each situation or mode differently and look at what is needed for that situation. The learning objectives for the library's courses are based on ACRL Standards as applicable. Information Literacy is also one of the college's Institutional Core Competencies (ICC). Learning objectives are created with the desired learning outcome and/or collaboration with teaching faculty in mind. we use ACRL standards. we create learning objectives and expected student learning outcomes hand-in-hand so that they are clear to the students and measurable. We tailor the objectives and student learning outcomes to the needs of individual classes or course-integrated library instruction. The assessment is done through hands-on learning exercises throughout the course or session or through exams for the library courses and/or oral quizzes at the end of the instructional sessions. The process for creating objectives follows those laid out by our college's Curriculum Committee and Institutional Effectiveness committee. The objectives are based loosely on the ACRL standards No, but our College does. Follow rubrics and practices of campus at large for SLO's Question #5: Does your library instruction use rubrics or other instruments for measuring information literacy instruction? Yes No 19 (79%) 5 (21%) Comments: librarian-created assessments Learning Outcome Assessment Questions surveys We don't use rubrics, but the assessment of student learning outcomes is a formal
  8. 8.     Page 8 of 32   process. The assessment is more holistic than rubric-driven. Question #6: How does your library use rubrics for instruction? Concept Analysis of Comments (25 Participants Submitted Information) Concepts Most Frequently Identified: Frequency Concept 14 Evaluate Class Assignments 6 Uses Other Tools 3 SLO Assessment 3 Unique to Library Instructor 2 Assess Course SLO's 2 Doesn't Use Rubrics 2 Pre/Post Assessment 1 Based on ACRL Standards 1 Determine Grades 1 Evaluate Exams 1 ILO Assessment 1 Student Self Evaluation Question #8: How do you assess your learning objectives for your IL instruction. Concept Analysis of Comments (25 Participants Submitted Information) Concepts Most Frequently Identified: Frequency Concept 12 Surveys (Students, Faculty, Others) 7 Post Quiz 7 Student Assignments w/Rubrics 6 Student Assignments 4 Pre/Post Quiz 3 Exams 3 Usage Statistics 2 Discussions With Classroom Faculty and Others 2 Hands-on Exercises
  9. 9.     Page 9 of 32   1 Exam Questions 1 Holistic Analysis 1 Informal Assessment 1 Library Department Meetings 1 Observations 1 Tailored to Course 1 Worksheets Comments: biannual survey Pre-test / post-test methodology For library orientation [we use] surveys Number of students served, faculty survey, annual student survey. pre-test and post-test we are expanding to link more directly to, and assess the outcomes based on, the end results, i.e., the research assignment. In our one-shot sessions, we use online surveys administered to both students and the course instructors. We analyze how students do on culminating exercise using rubric and make changes accordingly. We also analyze the scores of different sections/instructors and instructors make changes accordingly. Rubrics assessing student work (quizzes, final exams, homework assignments) for credit courses, post-instruction quiz for library orientations. For classes we use questions from exams and the scores (passing or not) from some assignments. For workshops, we are using a short multiple-choice questionnaire that is either done pre-post or just post, depending on time and other factors. For reference, we are using a post questionnaire. For tutorials, they have a quiz as part of it, and we look at if they students passed the quiz, which requires answering 70% of the questions correctly. Credit courses: exams and homework assignments. Orientations: hands-on lab exercises (tailored for each class and done collaboratively between the librarian/instructor and classroom instructor). We measure statistics or *hits* for libguides created for instruction. We also send out surveys to instructors for feedback on the content / delivery of the instructional session. Measures of evaluation based on specific student learning outcomes ( e.g. instructor questionnaire and reference desk statistics). Indirect measures assessing various aspects of the program (e.g. needs assessments, direct observations, anecdotal evidence, discussion with instructors, etc.). Regular data collection and analysis using such measures (e.g. weekly meetings of library faculty, departmental meeting with Library Director). Periodic revision of program based on data analysis (e.g. Program Review). We have students complete a five question test pre and post orientation session
  10. 10.     Page 10 of 32   instructor survey. Through librarian-created information literacy tests given post IL instruction. for the credit courses via rubrics with keys for the hands-on workbook assignments, tests (quizzes and final exams), class presentations/activities, application of information literacy through a final research project, development of a pathfinder, research paper. for course-integrated instruction and hands-on library workshops via oral quizzes and hands-on application in class. Every semester we assess the slos for one or two orientations and one unit bearing course. The instructor for the session writes up a proposal including the slo(s) being assessed, the assignment, the method, the rubric and the results of this assessment and then their recommended changes to instruction to improve slo results next time. We don't use rubrics, but the assessment of student learning outcomes is a formal process. The assessment is more holistic than rubric-driven. surveys, quizzes, worksheets. We use grading rubrics and base our assessment on the assignment grade. assessment depended primarily on the preference of the instructor librarian. However, all full time librarians were involved in an examination of the assessment results and analysis of data. A rubric to apply to final English research papers. A rubric to apply to a “search and quick write” in-class exercise. Student Feedback Survey. Direct assessment (i.e., quizzes). Student surveys re: research behaviors. Within each cycle one objective is selected. A sample of work is taken from each session of LIS 10, and the work is blindly assessed using a rubric. The instructors write a report, based on the outcomes, and submit assessment to college. informal or qualitative assessments of student work. Question #9: Student learning outcomes for IL instruction (please check all that apply). Choice Selected Number Selecting Percent Selecting SLO's for Credit Courses 6 25% SLO's for Reference 4 17% SLO's for Virtual Reference 1 4% SLO's for One-Shots/BI 8 33% SLO's for Scheduled Workshops 5 21% Question #10: SLO’s for credit courses (Please share any SLO’s you have for your credit courses. Please indicate if the course is online, hybrid or in person and if the SLO’s change due to method of delivery). No participant indicated different SLO’s per method of delivery.
  11. 11.     Page 11 of 32   In Person Online Hybrid 6 (40%) 8 (53%) 1 (7%) Concept Analysis (16 Participants Submitted Information) Concepts Most Frequently Identified: Frequency Concept 13 Evaluate Information 10 Citations 8 Information Formats 5 Search Strategies 5 Keywords 4 Synthesize Information 5 Information Ethics 4 Analyze & Articulate Information Need 3 Locate Information 2 Plagiarism 2 Retrieve Information 2 Select Information 2 Select Topics 3 Select & Use Search Tools 1 Access Information 1 Blogging 1 Controlled Vocabulary 1 Evaluate Databases 1 Identify Research Process 1 Internet Applications 1 Popular vs. Scholarly Information 1 Scope of Information 1 Select Information Tools 1 Select Writing Style 1 Technology Skills 1 Understand Research Process 1 Use Information Comparison to ACRL Definition of Information Literacy
  12. 12.     Page 12 of 32   For this question, an additional analysis was done based on the concepts in the table above. They were compared to the definition of an Information Literate person by the ACRL. Each concept was connected to a part of the definition (when possible) and the total concepts were counted for each part. Then a percentage of the total counted were determined for each part of the definition. Note: This is based on the old definition and not the newly created framework. 11% Determine the extent of information needed. 40% Access the needed information effectively and efficiently. 17% Evaluate information and its sources critically. 0% Incorporate selected information into one’s knowledge base. 9% Use information effectively to accomplish a specific purpose. 21% Understand the economic, legal, and social issues surrounding the use of information, and access and use information ethically and legally. 2% Did not fit into the definition. Comments: 1) Develop skills that will facilitate college-level research. 2) Select, evaluate and synthesize information found in print and electronic resources. Frist Class: 1) Synthesize and apply evaluation techniques to select quality information sources from a variety of resources. 2) Construct a works cited list using the Modern Language Association (MLA) standard. Second Class: 1) Applying basic technology skills, as needed, to locate, retrieve and evaluate a variety of reliable information resources, both print and electronic, to produce a brief piece of writing on a focused topic that refers to, or cites, information sources. 2) Employ conventions of acknowledging the work of others. First Class: 1) The student will successfully select and focus a research topic. 2) Given a specific research topic, the student will develop and execute an effective research strategy utilizing advanced search techniques. 3) Student will critically evaluate the credibility and quality of an information source by applying a prescribed set of criteria. 4) The student will identify citation elements in a variety of information sources and consistently apply a citation style in referencing information. 5) The student will compare and contrast characteristics of popular and scholarly information sources. Second Class: 1) Student will distinguish among the various types of print and electronic resources. 2) Student will select appropriate tools for finding various types of information resources. 3) The student will evaluate a website by assessing its authority, accuracy, currency, and point of view. 4) The student will identify and select keywords and search terms that represent information need or research question. 5) Given a specific information source, the student will construct a correct citation in MLA citation format Frist Class: 1) Students will be able to use electronic search tools efficiently and effectively. 2) Students will evaluate sources of information for authority, timeliness, bias, and appropriateness to information need. Second Class: 1) Students will select and
  13. 13.     Page 13 of 32   use search tools to locate information resources that meet clearly stated information needs. 2) Students will evaluate sources of information for authority, timeliness, bias and appropriateness to information need. 3) Students will demonstrate a clear understanding of ethical and legal concerns related to the use and abuse of information. Third Class: 1) Students will effectively use Internet search tools to locate information resources. Frist Class: Evaluate several databases and select the appropriate one to find needed information. Second Class: Locate and appraise unbiased information about companies. Third Class: Evaluate web content by examining unbiased authoritative sites that provide reliable source material. Third Class: 1) Create and maintain a personal web log (blog) for the purpose of the class. 2) Demonstrate skill with utilizing current internet applications. 1) Locate and retrieve research-related information found on the Internet, (text, images, and multimedia), from full-text databases, online public access catalogs (OPACs), and the World Wide Web. 2) Use appropriate terms (either keywords or subjects) to find information from electronic information databases. 3) Evaluate results of print and electronic information searches for currency, accuracy, authority, purpose, and bias. 4) Synthesize information retrieved from print, online, and multimedia sources to create research projects, reports, or presentations. 5) Document and cite sources using approved academic standards such as those of the Modern Languages Association (MLA) or the American Psychological Association (APA). 6) Discuss ethical and privacy issues raised by the widespread use of the Internet. 1) Articulate an information need by stating a research question, problem or issue. 2) Analyze an information need and determine the type, amount, and depth of information required. 3) Identify, locate, and effectively utilize various types of information sources (books, periodicals, (print and electronic), media, indexes, Internet resources, etc. 4) Formulate search strategies in library catalogs, electronic databases, and the Internet using appropriate subject headings, keyword searches, and Boolean operators to retrieve relevant information. 5) Evaluate information sources in any format to determine type, relevancy to topic, bias, currency, and accuracy. 6) Organize information resources by preparing a bibliography using correct citation formats. 7) Assess the legal, ethical and privacy issues surrounding information and information technology. Students will be able to draw from a variety of resources to compile a bibliography for their chosen research topic using proper citation format. 1) Students will be able to understand how to properly cite sources in their research papers. Assessment: As demonstrated in class assignments, a research paper, and a final examination assessed with a faculty-devised rubric and/or a set of answer keys. The projected minimum level of successful performance is 70%. 2) The student will understand what plagiarism is and how to prevent plagiarism. Assessment: As demonstrated in class assignments, quizzes, and a final exam assessed with a faculty- devised rubric and/or checklist. The projected minimum level of successful performance is 70%. 3) Having selected a research topic, the student will be able to identify appropriate research tools to effectively retrieve and critically evaluate retrieved information. Assessment: As demonstrated in a number of class assignments assessed with a checklist and/or a set of answer keys. The projected minimum level of
  14. 14.     Page 14 of 32   successful performance is 70%. 1) After articulating a research need, construct and implement a search strategy using appropriate key concepts and terms in order to locate and retrieve books, articles, and authoritative web sites using a variety of library and Internet search tools. Assessment includes in-class exercises and a final project. 2) During the research process, differentiate between the types of sources obtained, evaluate the quality and relevance of these sources to the research question, and revise the search strategy, if necessary, to obtain more relevant results to the research assignment criteria. Assessment includes in- class exercises and a final project. 3) When producing a research paper, correctly synthesize source material into a bibliography or a list of references according to a specified style manual, such as MLA or APA. Assessment includes in-class exercises and a final project. 1) List and explain the steps in the research process. 2) Identify types and formats of information sources appropriate for college research, explaining purpose and audience. 3) Access information efficiently by refining a search strategy, using keywords, controlled vocabulary, and advanced search techniques. 4) Critically evaluate information by applying standard criteria. 5) Recognize and use correct documentation style in parenthetical and bibliographic citations. 6) Examine the basic legal and ethical issues of intellectual property such as copyright, fair use, and plagiarism. 1) Students will identify and critically evaluate appropriate resources. [Target: 75% of students completing Part 1 of the Final Exam will achieve 70% accuracy when graded against a department rubric.] 2) When using information, students will correctly identify when citations are required. [Target: 75% of students completing the When to Cite quiz will achieve 70% accuracy.] 3) Students will create correctly formatted citations in multiple formats. [Target: 75% of students completing the Citing Sources assignment will achieve 70% accuracy when graded against a departmental rubric.] 1) Understand that research is an interactive process that involves strategy, practice and trial and error. 2) Move from a broad topic to a manageable research question. 3) Identify key terms in order to answer a research question. 4) Use library and other information resources to find relevant, credible information on a topic. 5) Use evaluation criteria to determine the value of an information source. 6) Use a selected writing style in order to avoid plagiarism and to document sources cited in a paper or project. 1) Identify information formats and the ways we share them. 2) Formulate viable research questions. 3) Employ effective search strategies across a variety of search tools. 4) Critically evaluate the authority and relevance of information sources. 5) Practice ethical use of information. Question #11: Please share any SLO’s for your non-credit instruction, especially for those that are delivered virtually). Concept Analysis of Comments (22 Participants Submitted Information) Concepts Most Frequently Identified:
  15. 15.     Page 15 of 32   Frequency Concept 30 Select & Use Search Tools 10 Citations 9 Evaluate Information 6 Access Information 4 None 4 Search Strategies 3 Analyze & Articulate Information Need 3 Identify Research Process 3 Popular vs. Scholarly Information 3 Technology Skills 3 Understand Subject Matter 3 Use Information 2 Distant Use of Library Resources 2 Does Not Have Non-credit Instruction 2 Information Ethics 2 Library Services 2 Research Strategies 2 Think Critically 1 Annotated Bibliographies vs. Abstracts 1 Books vs. Periodicals 1 Boolean Operators 1 Call Numbers 1 Campus Services 1 Determine Information Need 1 Incorporate New Knowledge 1 Information Formats 1 Learning Express 1 Periodicals 1 Plagiarism 1 Primary vs. Secondary Information 1 Same as Credit Instruction 1 Search Techniques 1 Specialized Encyclopedias 1 Structure of Journal Articles 1 Textbook Reserves 1 Think Creatively 1 Use Classification Systems 1 Variable Based on Need
  16. 16.     Page 16 of 32   1 Writing Techniques Comparison to ACRL Definition of Information Literacy 8% Determine the extent of information needed. 49% Access the needed information effectively and efficiently. 15% Evaluate information and its sources critically. 4% Incorporate selected information into one’s knowledge base. 1% Use information effectively to accomplish a specific purpose. 13% Understand the economic, legal, and social issues surrounding the use of information, and access and use information ethically and legally. 8% Did not fit into the definition. 3% Could be applied to all concepts of the definition. Question #12: Please share any instances where you changed you IL instruction because of SLO results. Concept Analysis of Comments (19 Participants Submitted Information) Concepts Most Frequently Identified: Frequency Concept 8 Revised Course/Workshop Content 5 Revised Assignment 3 Revised SLO's 2 Currently Assessing SLO's 2 Increased Hands-on Exercises 2 No Changes 1 Created Online Content 1 Created Rubric 1 Developed Course for Basic Skills Students 1 Increased Number of Workshops 1 Increased Time on Topic 1 No SLO's for Non-Credit
  17. 17.     Page 17 of 32   Questions 1) How does your library identify the learning objectives for information literacy instruction? Is there a different process for creating learning objectives depending upon the methods of delivery for instruction, especially online? 2) Are your SLO’s publicly posted on your website. 3) Please share any instances where you changed your Information Literacy instruction because of SLO results. 4) Describe library initiatives/activities funded through Student Equity, or proposals you are currently working on related to Equity funding. 5) What professional development are you and your library colleagues engaged in? 6) What additional professional development needs do you have? 7) Hot topics, issues, concerns, opportunities we should be thinking about. Overlap with Online Survey Some of the questions from the regional meeting matched questions from the online survey. These questions are: Regional Meeting Question Online Survey Question #1 #2 #2 #7 & #13 #3 #12 When there is a match, an analysis of the regional meeting data will be followed by a discussion of concepts that overlap with the online survey’s data. However, Question #7 and Question #13 on the online survey, which matched Question #2 on this survey, did not have comments. Documents were uploaded and all will be analyzed together. Question #1: How does your library identify the learning objectives for information literacy instruction? Is there a different process for creating learning objectives depending upon the methods of delivery for instruction, especially online? Yes No 3 (21%) 11 (79%) More participants provided comments to this question than a ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ answer.
  18. 18.     Page 18 of 32   Concept Analysis of Comments (29 Participants) Concepts Most Frequently Identified: Frequency Concept 5 Use ACRL Standards 5 Developed by Librarians 4 Develop with Course Instructor 3 Surveys 2 Use Other Library Examples 2 None Developed for Online 2 Use SLO’s 1 Use Accreditation Recommendation 1 Use ALA Guidelines 1 Use COR of Course 1 Base on Discipline of Course 1 Use ILO's 1 Use Outside Examples 1 Campus-wide Initiative 1 Created a Task Force 1 Develop With Other Faculty 1 Harder for Online 1 Not Systemic 1 Redevelop Annually 1 Assessment Results 1 Vary by Library Unit 1 Vary by Situation Comments: Librarian - driven process. No difference by modality. In coordination with course instructors. Learning objectives depend on course librarians are supporting. Learning objectives are developed in consultation with the course instructor; we have only recently started to work with online classes but objectives of library participation in online classes has also been developed in consultation with instructor of record. Consultation & faculty & assessment & students All staff/faculty workshop annually. No distinction between traditional & online ACRL, Look at other libraries, look for examples online (web) I borrow from other libraries! We have self-paced online tutorials, but we are not assessing them
  19. 19.     Page 19 of 32   Each unit if the library identifies its SLO's Surveys. By personal discussion with faculty. As I am the intern, I have not had previous experience with this. The fulltime librarians (4) worked on them agreed. There is a listing of about 6. Depending on the venue, SLO's are selected from the 6. At FLC, the info. literacy objectives are based on ACRL (the old standards). SLO's for general lib. Orientations. No formalized SLO's for our online tutorial Librarians worked on GE college wide SLO's and includes outcome on info lit based on ACRL Standards. Do not have diff learning outcomes for instruction. Library instructor(s) determine Lo's for bibliographic instruction. For credit instruction Lo's done by individual faculty Based on elements defined in info literary (e.g. Identify topic; identify resources, etc.). Same outcomes/objectives. But methods may be somewhat different Faculty discussion; No differentiation for online Will answer survey Through discussions, of libraries ????? ?????. We currently have no online instructors. ACRL_ Elac's IGELO's_ dialogue w/librarians. No ACLRL guidelines - mapped. Stamonica & Pasadena/ google docs; 1/2/3 F.Y.E Pathways & online modules & 1 in person oneshot On a case by case basis - No system. Yes. Online is different, more challenging. ALA guidelines. Is there alignment w/ CSU/ÓUSC's? Task Force created in response to Accreditation r3ecommendations. We are making it a campus wide initiative. A tutorial or assessment tool is being developed for students to take before they transfer. Workshops - ALA - COR - web conferencing - English, Speech, Philosophy, Paralegal ALS Based on classes served - using course outline of record. Small literacy learning section. Institutional Outcomes that included information competency - Voting today. No Survey On survey - Info survey For classes online and face to face learning objectives are the same Overlap of Regional Meeting Survey with Online Survey Question #1 from this survey is the same as Question #2 from the online survey. When comparing their responses, there is some overlap. Each survey has the same top ranked concept, which is to base learning objectives on the ACRL IL Standards. For the regional meeting, five respondents (out of 29) mentioned that, and four respondents (out of 12) mentioned it on the online survey. This is a clear indicator of how important the ACRL Standards are to CCC Libraries and raises the question of how the new ACRL IL Framework may or may not affect this. While there were other areas of overlap, there was no other concept as equally favored in both surveys. For example, “Development or Discussion Only Among Librarians” was
  20. 20.     Page 20 of 32   tied for first in the regional meeting survey while “Use SLO’s” was tied for first in the online survey. Common Concept Think Sheet Count Online Survey Count Total Count Use ACRL Standards 5 4 9 Develop or Discuss Only Among Librarians 5 1 6 Use SLO's 2 4 6 Specific to Course or Created With Course Instructor 4 1 5 Use ILO's 1 3 4 Work or Discuss With Other Faculty 1 1 2 Assessment Results 1 1 2 Question #2: Are your SLO’s publicly posted on your website? Yes No 18 (60%) 12 (40%) Question #3: Please share any instances where you changed your Information Literacy instruction because of SLO results. Concept Analysis of Comments (10 Participants) Concepts Most Frequently Identified: Frequency Concept 6 No Changes 5 Changed Course/Workshop Content 2 Created New Course 1 Changed Assessment 1 Collection Development 1 Continuous Process to Inform Instruction 1 Funding 1 Identified Needs 1 Unknown 1 Use Surveys Instead of SLO's Comments:
  21. 21.     Page 21 of 32   Increased focus on areas identified as needing further attention This is a continuous process where SLO results & other assessments (informal) inform (I.L.) instructors. Students complete evaluations or turn in worksheets after about _ of our instruction sessions; this feedback often changes future sessions such as adding more hands on activity, adjusting content to better cover topic, etc. SLO _collection development & funding Too new I am new to the position, so there hasn't been a instance We realized the question did not measure what we wanted to measure. N/A I don't know Yes. Students indicated wanting to have hands-on lab as part of bibliographic instruction Created new course (LIS 200) to address needs of students who were not prepared for our transfer-level course (LIS 85) N/A Created new course (LIS 200) to address needs of students who were not prepared for our transfer-level course (LIS85). The SLOs are reviewed regular intervals but no changes have been made as a result When we divided to do customized orientations Changed as a result of surveys, not SLO's N/A Assessment results have driven the change in courses. We offer a new course, over 50 to respond to Basic Ed and ESL students Survey See survey Pedagogy was modified for teaching search strategies based on the assessment results. Overlap of Regional Meeting Survey with Online Survey Question #3 from this survey is the same as Question #12 from the online survey. When looking for overlap, only two concepts appear on both: No revisions were made or course/workshop content was changed. It would appear, from this, that most CCC Libraries are either changing their teaching or making no changes at all. This is a significant contrast in outcomes data application. Concept Think Sheet Count Online Survey Count Total Count Changed Course/Workshop Content 5 8 13 No Changes 6 6 12
  22. 22.     Page 22 of 32   Question #4: Describe library initiatives/activities funded through Student Equity, or proposals you are currently working on related to Equity funding. Concept Analysis of Comments (28 Participants) Concepts Most Frequently Identified: Frequency Concept 6 Increased Textbook Reserves 6 None 4 Increased Staffing 3 Requested Funding 2 Increased Course Offerings 1 Added Concierge/Personal Librarian Services 1 Changed IL Program 1 Conference Attendance 1 Created Makerspace 1 Created Online Tutoring 1 Created Veteran's Services 1 Hired Tutoring Staff 1 Increased Book Collection 1 Increased Hours 1 Library Connected to Student Equity Activities Comments: Working on potentially finding a summer Library 100 class w/equity funds. MAYBE (linked or targeted to our Summer boost program) -never funded a class in many years =equity. Library tied to numerous activities in our various plans (FYE course, student success coaches, etc.); no direct funding. Seeking an opening to request funding for adjunct librarian. $15K for reserve books at main campus & remote campus. None yet but are looking forward to participating. New position in the Wor?? Tutoring staff funded, Online tutoring software, Textbook library funded None Textbooks. Part of planning for Academic Support. Finding additional faculty. Value to Administration slowing our impact. We requested but received none I have money to update our basic reading collection & to include books from a wider variety of ethnic backgrounds. ($1,000.)The lib. Is also considering for a grant to staff
  23. 23.     Page 23 of 32   virtual ref. svc. None currently. Trying to get temporary classified staff funding for computer help $3,000 for information literacy redesign. Conference or adjunct. Conferences: BSILI, On course, Curriculum. Adjunct backfills None Expand library hours (e.g. Saturday, later evening) College does not have annual process for submitting equity funding proposals. Administrators have asked me about what colleges have used equity funds for library. Proposals in development: Embedded librarian for online courses, Instructional videos (Info Lit), Consultant to help assess equity needs Textbook funding - gar - reserves; BSI - $10,000 - textbooks - 1 wk. checkout - SJC: 1st year/ 1st generation/concierge/personal librarian. Foothill - 50 students - face to face. West Valley 300 ??? - 5 ????????? Expand library hours (e.g. Saturday, later evening) College does not have annual process for submitting equity funding proposals. Administrators have asked me what colleges have used equity funds for library. We have applied for a college Foundation Grant to purchase high speed scanners & IPads. This is NOT State Equity money Reference appts. - adjunct hrs., Makerspace, Exhibit & training - veterans Funds to buy textbooks for course reserves; Funds to support library cram night, funds to hire student ambassadors, funds to pay GURL database (first e-books we could afford) N/A A student group is funding textbooks. Part of the budget is being supplemented by student equity funds. Hire new Librarians - are included workshops - literacy Foothill is piloting a First Year Experience targeting underrepresented groups. Students will take a 1-unit library course and be matched with a personal librarian. None Currently they are not funding anything, we have a librarian on the committee. Question #5: What professional development are you and your library colleagues engaged in? Concept Analysis of Comments (25 Participants Submitted Information) Concepts Most Frequently Identified: Frequency Concept 33 Workshops/Conferences 8 - Not Specified
  24. 24.     Page 24 of 32   4 - CCL 4 - Info People 3 - CCLI 3 - Internet Librarian 2 - ACRL 2 - ALA 2 - CARL 1 - CLA 1 - Library System 1 - User Group 1 - WOBAC 1 - CSU 10 Online Training 9 Campus Professional Development 2 Internal Library Training 2 New Faculty Orientation 1 Accreditation 1 Convocation 1 Courses 1 Membership in Professional Organizations 1 Reading Professional Literature 1 Reflective Writing Challenge 1 Student Equity 1 Visiting Other Colleges Question #6: What additional professional development needs do you have? Concept Analysis (20 Participants Submitted Information) Concepts Most Frequently Identified: Frequency Concept 3 Advocate for Increased Funding 3 Statistical Analysis 3 Teaching Practice 2 ACRL IL Framework 2 Leadership 2 Outcomes & Assessments 2 Unknown 1 Advocate for Non-service Hours
  25. 25.     Page 25 of 32   1 Book Repair 1 Collaboration 1 Conference Attendance 1 Customer Service 1 Equity Funding 1 None 1 Outside Speakers for Staff 1 Training for Adjuncts 1 Training for Classified Staff Comments: Leadership, IL Framework Local/online for classified Leadership development Too soon to tell I want to learn pedagogy, specific to libraries, but also learning in general Canvas tutorial on Information Literacy My colleagues have ided many substantial conferences but we do not have the faculty to cover their time not the financial support Statistics. Use experience, usability. New framework. Getting funding/advocacy. ÒUsing library statistics visual data design. Money to cover true costs of pro. Dev., including time. Need more down time so that all staff can participate - Identify a day when we can close? (e.g. for customer service) We also need training in book repair Not sure Need more down time so that all staff can participate - Identify a day when we can close? (e.g. for customer service) We also need training in book repair. None, Currently we have funding at the campus level for most of our professional development needs. Staff and customer service PD Meet every other week - bring in speakers ALA in June 2015 Adjuncts need Professional Development opportunities too! After presentation by Alicia Virtue, I want to learn how to create infographics! Instruction, collaboration, SLO's, assessments, SAO's what library should do to get equity funding. Question #7: Hot topics, issues, concerns, opportunities we should be thinking about. Concept Analysis (23 Participants Submitted Information)
  26. 26.     Page 26 of 32   Concepts Most Frequently Identified: Frequency Concept 6 Open Educational Resources 3 Inmate Services 3 Library as Place 3 New ILS's 3 Funding (Staff) 2 Funding (General) 2 Learning Commons 2 Outcomes & Assessments 2 Staffing Standards 1 Accreditation 1 BYOD 1 Grants 1 IL Competency 1 Library Place on Campus Website 1 Materials Funding 1 Single-Librarian Libraries 1 Online Education Initiative 1 Open Source Library Systems 1 Outcomes & Assessments (Reference) 1 State Support for EBSCO 1 Student Grief Counseling 1 Student Safety 1 Students Labs 1 Technology Access Comments: SLO's _gathering + evaluation for reference we are struggling w/this How to do , etc. Assessment OER, assessment Next generation ILS Staffing, funding, grant opportunities/coordination with student lab services. Student safety New ILS. Increasing FT staff library as place _learning commons Library system, Library as place _learning commons Access to technology _support students (bring your own devices) Incarcerated (games, plants, Students' puzzles) Correction to Social Services, Grief. Access to funding. Being the sole librarian for three campuses, not enough time to accommodate all needs.
  27. 27.     Page 27 of 32   Statewide advocacy for consistent funding & more fulltime faculty Statewide standard for staffing based on onsite D.E. FTES. Statewide I.L.S. Need official CCL recommendation that college websites have direct link to library on main college website. OER Citation -EBSCO State issues supported /LS - 3 yrs.? OERs, Open source products/application, free e-textbooks OER's, free textbooks, accreditation OER's textbooks for students list funding sources on website - & when they are avail. Minimum staff standards, Prisons & jail "ILL's +info lit competency OER, Inmate Education The changing needs of the library space _ noise, quiet study, food, study spaces, group link-up spaces. Assessment OEI Funding for library materials.
  28. 28.     Page 28 of 32   Appendix A: Online Survey
  29. 29.     Page 29 of 32  
  30. 30.     Page 30 of 32  
  31. 31.     Page 31 of 32   Appendix B: Council of Chief Librarians Information Literacy Advisory Committee Members Committee Chair: Cheryl Delson, Irvine Valley College Doug Achterman - Galvin College Micaela Agyare – Foothill College Shelley Blackman – Evergreen Valley College Morgan Brynnan - Butte College Ellen Carey – Santa Barbara City College Lena Chang – De Anza College April Cunningham - Palomar Community College Heather Dodge – Berkeley City College Kathleen Ennis – Modesto Junior College Sarah Frye - College of Marin Krista Goguen - Pasadena City College Alison Gurganus – San Diego Mesa College Brandee Idlemann – Irvine Valley College Scott Lee – Antelope Valley Richard Ma – Mira Costa College Michelle Morton – Cabrillo College David Patterson - College of Marin Sandra Pesce – San Diego City College Sandy Rotenberg - Solano Community College Jun Wang – San Joaquin Delta College
  32. 32.     Page 32 of 32   Appendix C: CCL Deans & Directors’ Meeting Think Sheet

×
https://es.slideshare.net/slee4000/council-of-chief-librarians-survey-results-executive-summary
es.slideshare.net
CC-MAIN-2023-06
481157
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:3ZHMJEEVBSACULRT4SHH7SG6E74BGDDT
<urn:uuid:f1a2f8d2-8dac-4af5-90cf-33d8409afd06>
2023-02-05T21:02:00Z
146.75.34.152
text/html
sha1:SSQNEDYZXNBJVF3W5IUWT3WMCFATIBF3
<urn:uuid:18a76f91-731f-48a3-9708-99e575691261>
https://es.slideshare.net/slee4000/council-of-chief-librarians-survey-results-executive-summary
response
<urn:uuid:83e907b1-ea58-4984-a443-79b053f1559f>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2023-06
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for January/February 2023
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-225
software: Apache Nutch 1.19 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.4-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/