1 / 9

Applying Assessment Results: Promise or Peril?

Applying Assessment Results: Promise or Peril?. Utah Library Association Annual Conference May 18, 2006 Wendy Holliday Coordinator of Library Instruction Merrill-Cazier Library Utah State University. Presentation Goals. Provide practical tips on using assessment in a programmatic way

riva
Télécharger la présentation

Applying Assessment Results: Promise or Peril?

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. Applying Assessment Results: Promise or Peril? Utah Library Association Annual Conference May 18, 2006 Wendy Holliday Coordinator of Library Instruction Merrill-Cazier Library Utah State University

  2. Presentation Goals • Provide practical tips on using assessment in a programmatic way • Show how to use “negative” results to your advantage

  3. Case One: English Value-Added Assessment What: Collaboration between English Department, Library, and Office of Analysis, Assessment and Accreditation Compared student essays at the beginning of English 1010 and the end of English 2010. Change in score is sign of “value-added.” • Scoring rubric included “use of evidence” • Citation analysis: did students cite outside sources and what did they cite?

  4. Value-Added Results (Micro) Students, in both years, cited websites most often: 2004: 132 (54.5%) 2005: 162 (63.8%) 2005: Only 4 (4%) of students used a print source of any type

  5. Value-Added Results (Macro) • Justified ongoing commitment to change library instruction in English 1010 • Increased level of integration: co-created assignment • Increased number of librarian visits • Focused instruction less on search skills and more on introducing different kinds of sources • Social capital: • Invited to participate in 2nd assessment • Data reported at assessment and English conferences • Accreditation bonus points!

  6. General Education Audit • Analyzed 192 syllabi from 162 general education courses (68% of all general education courses offered) • Looked for information literacy components in assignments and class activities • Recorded whether they mentioned the library

  7. General Education Results (Micro) • 89 (46%) courses included information literacy assignments • 49 (55%) of these assignments required outside sources • 20 (22.5%) mentioned the library

  8. General Education Results (Macro) • Individual change: • Contacted about adding IL to individual classes • Campus change: • General Education Subcommittee will re-examine course requirements and explore ways to better meet goal of information literacy • Will expand IL component of CIL (computer and information literacy) exam • Social Capital: • Report sent to statewide general education committee • Accreditation bonus points!

  9. Lessons Learned • Don’t just gather data: use it! • Focus on long-term goals • Don’t fear negative results • Build (and use) social capital

More Related