in years past librarians noticed the decline in reference services and library instruction. faculty...
Post on 20-Dec-2015
221 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
In years past librarians noticed the decline in reference services and library instruction.
Faculty members noticed a decline in the quality of student work and an increase in the incidence of plagiarism.
In 2006, the library director along with a group of librarians began to plan a faculty information literacy institute to address these concerns.
Introduction:
Write a Title 3 grant to fund the project◦ The grant was planned to work with up
to 40 faculty per year◦ Pay the faculty a $900.00◦ Hire a consultant to work with the
faculty members◦ Provide staff development sessions to
enhance the librarians skills◦ Hire a person to work with the faculty
members and plan future faculty institutes
◦ Purchase reading materials for the participants to read to prepare them for the 2-day institute
Process:
Identify the needs of the faculty Solicit faculty participation Achieve buy-in from university administration Identify possible speakers for the faculty
institute
Process Continued:
Update on completed sessions:◦ To date there have been 5
institutes since January 2008◦ There have been 72 participants
and a total of 356 library instruction sessions held
◦ Faculty members have stated that participating in this program and collaborating with librarians on their assignments have greatly improved the quality of student work
◦ Faculty participants have come from a variety of departments.
Conducting:
Began as a 2-day program, now it is typically 1 ½ days in length
Participants are given a pre-institute reading assignment on information literacy. The first two institutes focused on readings from the Collaborative Imperative. The remaining institutes’ participants were given articles to read that focused on information literacy and plagiarism. The readings were used to foster small and large group discussions
Program Structure:
The first institute participants were required to post comments to the readings on a blog.
This was assigned to increase the faculty members’ knowledge of web 2.0 technologies.
This was phased out in the other institutes because during evaluations and observations we found that it was more beneficial to focus on the various electronic resources available within the library and plagiarism and address web 2.0 technologies through individual requests.
Program Structure:
An extensive session on active learning and the librarians’ role in the creation and completion of successful class assignments is presented during each institute.
A librarian consultant is contracted to present a two hour session on information literacy, active learning, and the successful class assignment.
During the presentation, attendees are given the opportunity to storyboard an assignment at which time librarians work with the faculty members to show them where an information literacy component and library visit can be inserted.
Program Structure:
After the session on information literacy, faculty and librarians work together in small groups to learn about available resources and how to tweak their own assignment to incorporate an information literacy component.
Program Structure:
To receive the stipend faculty members must meet all of the program requirements:◦ Attend and actively participate in the
institute◦ Schedule a consultation session with the
subject specialist librarian to tweak an existing assignment to include information literacy experiences
◦ Schedule a library instruction class and bring the students (do not send) and make sure that they are aware of their impending assignment
◦ Require the students to schedule a consultation with the librarian
Program Structure:
The plagiarism discussion is important Faculty really do need to be shown
how the library can fit into their class assignments
Once we show them what we can do they are more open and willing to collaborate with us for their students’ success
We (the librarians) need to learn how to anticipate.
We did not expect the overwhelming response and the dramatic increase in library instruction as a result of this program
Lessons learned:
71 participants, 356 classes Reference statistics have dramatically
increased from 4284 in 2006 – 07 to 11889 in 2008-09
Research consultations have more than doubled Library instruction has increased from 189 in
2007 to 256 in 2008 and 317 in 2009. Faculty consultations and contacts have
increased from 1169 in 2007 to 2012 in 2008 and 2673 in 2009.
Statistical overview:
2006-07 2007-08 2008-090
100200300400
189256
317
Instruction
+26%
+19%
2006-07 2007-08 2008-090
5,000
10,000
15,000
4,284
11,773 11,889
Reference Desks
+64%
+1%
2007-08 2008-090
1,000
2,000
3,0001,361
2,058
Student Consultations and Contact
+34%
2006-07 2007-08 2008-090
1,000
2,000
3,000
1,169
2,0122,673
Faculty Consultation and Contacts
+42%
+25%
To date faculty members have stated that student papers have improved the number of students who plagiarize their assignments have decreased among those faculty members that have participated in the O’K Scholars Institute.
Evaluation:
The QEP and the institute: The O’K Scholars Institute has
been embraced by the university administration
The faculty members that are on the QEP team are strongly recommended to participate in the program
Information literacy is now a component of the general education program
The Future:
http://wssu.libguides.com/okfellowssample
Visit the link below for more information on the O’K Fellows Program
top related