In December 2004, members of the George A. Smathers Libraries Public
Services Council met to discuss the state of library instruction and
information literacy at the University of Florida. The agenda for the
meeting was to “to identify an approach and parameters for a library-wide
instruction program. The first order of business will be for PSC to
identify issues/concerns that need to be dealt with and then present
a team to be headed by Jana Ronan with a general charge. The team would
have the authority to add members from other library units as deemed
appropriate by the team members to ensure library-wide representation
in the process. Parameters/boundaries for the team to work within will
be discussed and then be clearly delineated. Issues, such as the team's
ability to recommend reporting lines and job assignments, should be
defined.” (Public Services Council, Agenda, December 1, 2004).
Librarians representing all areas of public services were drafted to
work on the team. The team members include Tara Cataldo, Patrick Reakes,
Paul Victor and Jana Ronan.
The team has spent four months studying the instructional environment
here at the university, as well as local and ACRL standards and guidelines
for information literacy. After an examination of the literature, other
university library instruction programs and consultation with George
A. Smathers Libraries faculty and staff, the team formulated the following
set of recommendations to share with the Public Services Council.
1. Goals
The basic goals and objectives articulated in our existing Library Instruction
Program remain valid. The team took the liberty of making some small
revisions to bring the document up to date with the information resources
and library catalog system currently in use. References to instructional
support for distance learners were added to the document.
Recommendations:
- Retain the Library Instruction Program, with minor revisions (see
Appendix A.). Make the document more visible and encourage all instructors
to review it periodically.
- Be sensitive to the unique training needs of distance education
students and faculty (see 2j).
2. Communication and coordination
At the present time, there is a lack of consistent communication among
library instructors and public service units that support instructional
endeavors such as circulation or course reserves. In addition, instruction
is somewhat balkanized; librarians coordinating instruction in various
units are often unaware of what other colleagues are doing. Because
of the lack of communication and of an overall instructional coordinating
entity, there is duplication of effort in developing curriculum, instructional
aids and in working with user groups.
Another factor making coordination difficult across various units is
the increased demand for instruction by university faculty and programs
such as the University Writing Program, International Studies and others.
Instructional demand predictably peaks at the beginning of the fall
and spring semesters, times when other public services responsibilities
such as staffing the reference desk, are also intensive. To compound
the situation, instructional duties and responsibilities are not equitably
distributed among public services faculty and staff.
Recommendations:
- Create an email discussion list for teachers (already implemented)
- Establish a full-time library wide instruction coordinator, to
coordinate activities across branches, units and departments and provide
teacher support.
- Create a library wide Instruction/Information Literacy Committee.
(See Appendix B.)
- Include library instruction in the job responsibilities of all
new public services faculty and staff hires, requiring a set number
of hours (such as ten) a semester of teaching activities or support.
- Incorporate teaching or instructional support in the job assignments
of existing public services staff, also setting the number of hours
(such as ten).
- Coordinate publicity, marketing and news with the Communicating
with Users Group
- Distribute teaching load more equitably during times of intensive
demand, by requiring that everyone teach classes, or that other public
services staff support instructors by relieving them of regularly
assigned reference and other public service responsibilities
- Cultivate new library instructors with training and mentoring.
- Charge the instruction committee with developing orientation and
training opportunities for new faculty and staff.
- Assign a teaching mentor to each new faculty or staff member,
who would let the new person observe their classes, etc. Charge
the instruction committee with identifying mentoring possibilities
and development of a program.
- Implement vacation blackouts during peak periods of instructional
demand
- Charge an instruction committee representative with attending the
DCE (Distance, Continuing & Executive Education) Advisory Board
monthly meetings, to monitor UF developments in this area, and to
advocate library instruction.
- Continue to foster non-public service staff participation in user
awareness and orientation level activities by including volunteers
- Hold instruction “town meetings” twice a year near the
beginning of fall and spring semesters to share news, ideas, syllabi
and technology updates.
3. Assessment
Our current library instruction program relies heavily upon volunteers
to work with big programs and in representing the library in various
programs, assemblies and other activities on campus. Some programs such
as the training for the University Writing Program, survey the writing
faculty for feedback on training effectiveness, yet the majority rely
upon attendee headcounts as an indicator of success. Increasing instructional
demand will continue to supply high statistics, but is a faulty measure
of instructional quality when it is the only measure used. Instruction
coordinators that manage large programs such as biology, that rely upon
the goodwill of their volunteer teachers, may wish to explore other
ways to assessing instruction, such as teacher performance, but are
afraid of losing volunteers. Another reason why instructors may not
explore other means of evaluating teaching is because development of
good tools can be very time consuming.
Recommendations:
- Move from the volunteer based program to required participation
in library instruction (see recommendation 2d-e), to support development
of instructor assessment and make it easier for supervisors to address
teaching performance in annual reviews.
- Charge Instruction/Information Literacy Committee with development
of assessment models and tools, and dissemination to teachers
- Assess student learning
- Develop pre tests to measure students’ knowledge of information
literacy concepts prior to library training
- Develop post tests to measure mastery and retention of concepts
after instruction sessions
- Develop online quizzes with certificates of completion
- Assess instructor effectiveness
- Encourage peer reviewing, where a teacher invites a colleague
to attend classes and give suggestions for improvement. These would
be voluntary, confidential reviews, not tied to library annual evaluations.
- Develop online class evaluations so that outside faculty and students
attending sessions may submit feedback online directly after the
class or even later. Evaluations could be tied to annual evaluations
for librarians with instruction in their job assignment.
- Videotape librarians; offer videotaping services so that teachers
may review their own performance after a session. This would be
voluntary and confidential, not tied to library annual evaluations.
- Use campus resources such as UCET to develop and deliver assessment
4. Technology
UF instruction librarians are very creative in employing available
technology such as e-reserves and the Web to support classroom teaching.
However, there is a need to invest money and development time in technology
to answer the ever-increasing demand for library instruction. Many university
libraries serving comparable populations are investing heavily in online
training to augment classroom instruction, as in the “Minute Modules”
tutorials offered by the PennState Libraries and the “Research
101” tutorial at the University of Washington. Other university
libraries are teaming with writing departments to incorporate online
information literacy tutorials in the curriculum, as in the example
of the “Assignment Calculator” at the University of Minnesota.
Recommendations:
- Provide systems support staff knowledgeable in instructional technology
- Extend instructional outreach to distance learners and satellites
by putting training online
- Create standardized, easily deliverable instructional online modules
addressing information core competencies (as prioritized by Instruction
Committee)
- Develop online modules of instruction in a format or medium that
UF faculty and instructors can easily link to from their websites
or within courseware
- Purchase equipment and software to support teaching such as wireless
projectors, smartboards, wireless keyboards, Camtasia, PhotoShop,
etc.
- Consistently train teachers in the use of technology
- Charge Instruction Committee and Instruction Coordinator with selection,
purchase, implementation of technologies, and establishing training
for instructors. Develop a checklist of skills or technology competencies
for teachers.
5. Training
There is a great desire for training in teaching methods, information
resources and in technology among the Smathers Libraries instructional
staff. Yet there are an impressive number of local and professional
resources of which we do not take full advantage. There is a need for
an organized, consistent program of training to orient new hires, to
galvanize and motivate practicing teachers, and to keep teachers abreast
of new developments in the field.
Recommendations:
- Charge the instruction committee with developing orientation and
training opportunities for new faculty and staff, such as regularly
scheduled “train-the-trainer” sessions.
- Assign a teaching mentor to each new faculty or staff member, as
mentioned in 2h.
- Use campus resources such as UCET more
- Bring in outside speakers and experts to motivate teachers
- Coordinate training with the Human Resources staff development program
as appropriate
- Provide funding for and encourage librarians to participate in relevant
NEFLIN and SOLINET classes, in ALA preconferences, web casts, and
to even take credit courses from the UF College of Education.
- Encourage supervisor support for training activities.
Sources Consulted:
ACRL. Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education.
American Library Association. Chicago, IL: 2000. Accessed March 28,
2005. http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlstandards/informationliteracycompetency.htm
Avery, Elizabeth Fuseler, ed. Assessing Student Learning Outcomes for
Information Literacy Instruction in Academic Institutions. ACRL, American
Library Association. Chicago, IL: 2003.
George A. Smathers Libraries. Library Instruction Program. University
of Florida. Gainesville, FL: 2001. Accessed March 28, 2005. http://web.uflib.ufl.edu/instruct/program.html
Information Literacy: University of Tennessee Libraries Long Range
Plan, 2004-2008. University of Tennessee. Knoxville, TN: 2004. Accessed
April 5, 2005. http://www.lib.utk.edu/refs/ilpg/longrpl08.pdf
Health Science Center Libraries. Library Instruction Class Evaluations
and Tests. University of Florida. Gainesville, FL: 2005. Accessed March
8, 2005. http://www.library.health.ufl.edu/services/instruction_evals.htm
PennState University Libraries. Instructional Programs. University
Park, PA: 2005. Accessed April 15, 2005. http://www.libraries.psu.edu/instruction/index.htm
Perkins Library System. Instruction & Outreach. Duke University
Libraries. Durham, NC: 2005. Accessed March 28, 2005. http://www.lib.duke.edu/services/instruction/
Shapiro, Jeremy J. and Shelley K. Hughes. “Information Literacy
as a Liberal Art: Enlightenment proposals for a new curriculum.”
Educom Review 31. 2 (Fall 1996). Accessed March 28, 2005. http://www.educause.edu/pub/er/review/reviewArticles/31231.html
University Center for Excellence in Teaching (UCET). University of
Florida. Gainesville, FL: 2005. Accessed April 5, 2005. http://www.ucet.ufl.edu/
University Libraries. Instruction and Outreach Committee. Ohio State
University. Columbus, OH: 2004. Accessed March 28, 2005. http://library.osu.edu/sites/staff/ioc/
University of Iowa Libraries. Instructional Services. University of
Iowa. Iowa City, IA: 2005. Accessed March 28, 2005. http://www.lib.uiowa.edu/instruction/
University of Michigan. University Library Instructor College. Ann
Arbor, MI: 2005. Accessed April 15, 2005. http://www.lib.umich.edu/icollege/
University of Minnesota Libraries. Assignment Calculator. Minneapolis,
MN: June 28, 2004. Accessed April 15, 2005. http://www.lib.umn.edu/help/calculator/
University of Washington Libraries. Teaching. University of Washington.
Seattle, WA: 2005. Accessed March 28, 2005. http://www.lib.washington.edu/ougl/teaching.html
Appendix A
Library Instruction Program Revision, March
2005
Appendix B
Recommendation to Form a Standing UF Libraries Instruction
Committee
Members:
Chair : Establish a permanent, full-time education coordinator.
Hire or reassign a public services librarian with recognized skills
and enthusiasm for library instruction.
H&SS Representative (represents Humanities & Social
Sciences department instructors)
Science Representative (represents Science Library instructors)
Collection Management/Special Collections Representative (represents
Collection Management, Area Studies and Special Collections instructors)
Branch Representative (represents Journalism, Music, Art/Architecture,
Education and Government Documents instructors)
Staff Representative (represents all non-librarian instructors)
- 1 representative from each section
- Rotating 2-year terms
- Representatives to be nominated by their division head and approved
by the committee chair
- Representatives will have the responsibility of reporting to their
respective groups (thru email, mini-meetings, etc.) and will also
poll their groups for information and opinions when needed by the
committee.
- If a representative cannot make a meeting, they will find a replacement
from their representative group to attend
- Alternative: have 2 instead of 1 representative from each group
It is recommended that the Instruction Committee hold an Instruction
Town Meeting with all instructors twice a year.
The committee is encouraged to include either the following people,
or guests from the listed areas, as appropriate:
- Systems
- Health Sciences Center Library
- Legal Information Center
- Director of Public Services
- Communicating with Users Group
- Webmaster
- Access Services
It is recommended that the committee meet monthly, or more often as
needed.
|
