1 / 11

Forging Faculty Librarian Collaborations in Information Literacy

Forging Faculty Librarian Collaborations in Information Literacy. Savannah State University October 1, 2010 Georgia Conference on IL. Summer 2009 13 Faculty Summer 2010 11 Faculty Representation across all Colleges of Savannah State University. Workshop participation. Faculty Feedback.

aristotle-russell
Télécharger la présentation

Forging Faculty Librarian Collaborations in Information Literacy

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Forging Faculty Librarian Collaborations in Information Literacy Savannah State University October 1, 2010 Georgia Conference on IL

  2. Summer 2009 13 FacultySummer 2010 11 FacultyRepresentation across all Colleges of Savannah State University Workshop participation

  3. Faculty Feedback “The quality and number of citations from the research project were significantly higher than in the past. This shows that information literacy…is an effective process…”. “I enjoyed working on this project to the point that I am implementing it again this semester.” “Working with this project helped the students become more skilled in writing while at the same time develop strength in research.”

  4. Forms of Assessment • SAILS testing—program wide • IL Instruction Statistics • Faculty Reports—(Webpage) • Evaluations by Faculty and Students “of” the program (feedback)

  5. Assessment at the program level • A knowledge test of multiple choice questions • Based on ACRL standards 1, 2, 3, 5 • Students are measured as a group/cohort • No individual scores • Reports are represented by class standing and major 333 Students in Fall 2009 241 Students in Spring 2010

  6. What SSU’s results tell us so far… • The higher the class standing, the better the scores • Students understand retrieving sources and using finding tool features the most • Students have the most difficulty with evaluating sources (one of the more advanced concepts of information literacy)

  7. Some Other Results … • Expansion of FYE Program • Additional Classroom needs (Scheduling ) • Return “Business” • “Referred Business” • Open House Participation • (2009—75 students, 2010—130 students)

  8. Student Feedback from an IL Workshop Class Session…. “I would suggest may be touring the library so it will be easier to locate certain books.” “ The only suggestion I have is that we could spend more time in the library. Other then that, it was very educational.” “One suggestion i have is that after the class has been informed on how to operate the library system then the class should be required to research a given topic so they would be comfortable using the system.” “I feel as though we should be able to do a research paper all together just to get a feel so we will be able to do a whole lot better on our own research paper.” “The only thing I would say that could improve this activity would be in we had our research topics with us and were able to begin looking for sources for our research project.”

  9. Lessons Learned… • How important a clear and detailed contract is for faculty participating in IL Workshop Program • Firm deadlines for completing tasks (i.e. syllabus modification, SAILS testing, final report) • Second Time Around • We required additional instruction sessions to be scheduled • Scheduled sessions were put into syllabus before start of semester

  10. Questions?

More Related