EAST TENNESSEE STATE UNIVERSITYQuality Enhancement Plan

Insightful Questions, Informed Answers

2 | ETSU QEP

INtopFORMInsightful Questions,

Informed Answersetsu.edu/intopform

Questioning - Seeking - Evaluating - Using - C

omm

unic

atin

g -

Recognizing -

INtopFORM:Insightful Questions, Informed Answers

East Tennessee State University Quality Enhancement Plan On-Site Review - February 2013

Developed by East Tennessee State University in preparation for reaffirmation of accreditation by the Commissionon Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools

4 | ETSU QEP

East Tennessee State UniversityQuality Enhancement Plan

Table of Contents

Executive Summary 6

1 Overview of the University 91.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91.2 Students and Faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91.3 The Undergraduate Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101.4 Information Fluency & ETSU’s Undergraduate Environment . . . . . . . . 11

2 Selecting INtopFORM 132.1 Overview of the QEP Selection & Development Process . . . . . . . . . . 132.2 Phases of the Selection Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142.3 Phases of the Development Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182.4 Final Campus Review & Adoption of the Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

3 Assessment Data Supporting Adoption of INtopFORM 233.1 Assessment of Students’ Information Technology Competence . . . . . 243.2 Assessment of Students’ Ability to Understand & Evaluate Evidence & Arguments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253.3 Assessment of Students’ Oral & Written Communication . . . . . . . . . . 253.4 Other Data: National Survey of Student Engagement . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

4 Goals of INtopFORM 294.1 Defining Student Learning Outcomes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 314.2 Advancing ETSU’s Mission & Strategic Priorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

INtopFORM: Insightful Questions, Informed Answers

| 5

5 Implementing INtopFORM 355.1 Introducing INtopFORM Skills in the First Year of College . . . . . . . . . 365.2 Enhancing INtopFORM Mastery in Programs of Study . . . . . . . . . . . . 375.3 Sponsoring Projects by Faculty Across the University . . . . . . . . . . . . 395.4 Fostering an Institutional Culture of Excellence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 405.5 Faculty Development in INtopFORM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

6 Assessing INtopFORM 516.1 Assessment Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 516.2 QEP Assessment Plans Consulted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 526.3 Assessment Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 526.4 Overview of INtopFORM Assessment Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

7 Institutional Capability to Support INtopFORM 677.1 Organizational Structure Supporting INtopFORM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 677.2 Key Personnel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 687.3 INtopFORM Leadership Team . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 697.4 Budget . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

8 Summary 67

References 74

Appendix Appendix A INtopFORM Summer Workshop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81Appendix B Program of Study Invitation to Participate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82Appendix C Faculty Fellowships: Request for Proposals . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85Appendix D Student Support & Engagement Projects, Requests for Proposals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87Appendix E Communication Team Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90Appendix F Director Quality Enhancement Plan, Job Description . . . . . . 92Appendix G Director Assessment & Teaching, Job Description . . . . . . . . 93Appendix H INtopFORM Librarian, Job Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94

6 | ETSU QEP

Executive SummaryQuestion

Study

Write

Live

Evaluate

Read

Seek

Communicate

Play

Learn

Use

Create

Analyze

Search

Blog

INtopFORM

Through a university-wide conversation about student learning and careful analysis of assessment data, ETSU has selected information fluency as the focus of its forthcoming Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP). INtopFORM will enable and encourage ETSU students to excel in seeking, using and communicating diverse and often complex information. The plan defines excellence with respect to six abilities essential for students’ professional success, personal fulfillment and active citizenship. Students who are INtopFORM ask insightful questions and are persistent and resourceful when seeking information. They thoughtfully evaluate the credibility and implications of information. They use information skillfully to accomplish their purposes and communicate information effectively to aid others’ understanding. They recognize their ethical obligations when seeking, using and communicating information. Underlying all of these abilities are attitudes of curiosity, disciplined skepticism and independence of thought.

Data from numerous longstanding assessments of undergraduate student learning and engagement at ETSU reveal a compelling need and a timely opportunity to enhance students’ information fluency. These data include first- and senior-year assessments of students’ oral communication, writing, critical thinking, and information technology skills. The results of the National Survey of Student Engagement further reinforced the relevance of a QEP focusing on information fluency. ETSU pursued a deliberate, inclusive process for selecting the theme of its QEP. Spanning approximately 12 months, the process engaged all of the university’s key stakeholders, including faculty, staff, undergraduate and graduate students, alumni, and community leaders. A university-wide survey in early fall 2011, to which nearly one thousand individuals responded, culminated the selection process, resulting in the adoption of INtopFORM as ETSU’s QEP. A QEP Develop-ment Team comprising outstanding faculty from across the university, as well as Student Affairs staff and undergraduate and graduate students, then drafted the implementation and assessment plan. Throughout the development process the team actively sought ideas and guidance from the university community through online surveys, meetings with university governance bodies, interviews with campus leaders, and a day-long retreat sponsored by President Brian Noland.

| 7

The implementation plan for INtopFORM focuses principally on undergraduate education. However, it also provides opportunities for participation by faculty members teaching graduate and professional students, and it invites all university units to propose projects to help ETSU students develop and apply information fluency skills. The plan has four components—introducing INtopFORM skills in the first year of college; enhancing INtopFORM mastery in undergraduate programs of study; awarding INtopFORM fellowships open to all faculty in undergraduate, graduate and professional programs; and creating a university-wide culture of excellence in information fluency. The last of these elements includes awarding INtopFORM student support and engagement grants for which all university units may apply.

ETSU’s Office of Assessment and Teaching will oversee and support assessment of INtopFORM learning outcomes, and the director of the QEP will track execution of the implementation plan. Measures of student learning include the California Critical Thinking Skills Test and the iSkills test, locally developed standardized exams, embedded assessments of students’ use of information in speaking and writing assignments in designated general education courses, and selected items on the National Survey of Student Engagement. Undergraduate programs participating in the QEP will develop discipline-appropriate assessments of their majors’ attainment of the INtopFORM learning outcomes, and INtopFORM fellows and units receiving student support and engagement grants will define and assess the expected results in their projects.

East Tennessee State University is fully committed to the successful implementation of INtopFORM. The university recently filled the position of director of Assessment and Teaching, whose responsibilities include oversight and support of assessment of the QEP. ETSU will also create three new, full-time positions as part of the plan—director of the Quality Enhancement Plan, executive aide to the director of the QEP, and INtopFORM librarian. In addition to funding these positions, ETSU has allocated significant financial resources to support assessment and implementation,including faculty development. To assure the continuing involvement of the entire university community, an INtopFORM leadership team will oversee the plan. Its membership will include the director of the QEP, the director of Assessment and Teaching, the INtopFORM librarian, students, faculty, and staff. The team will report annually to ETSU’s University Planning Committee, which oversees strategic initiatives.

“In the new economy, information, education, and motivation are everything.”

William Jefferson Clinton

8 | ETSU QEP

1.1 Introduction

East Tennessee State University is a public, coeducational institution located in Johnson City, Tennessee, in the mountains of Southern Appalachia. Governed by the Tennessee Board of Regents, ETSU is a multifaceteduniversity offering more than 100 baccalaureate, graduate and professional programs of study through its 11 colleges and schools. ETSU has a student population of over 15,000, including undergraduate, graduate and professional students. In addition to degree programs for residential and commuting students, the university offers many programs online or at sites beyond the main campus in Johnson City.

1.2 Students and Faculty Education is ETSU’s foremost mission, and the university is committed to improving the level of educational attainment in Tennessee and the region. More than 12,000 undergraduate students study at ETSU, nearly 85% of them full-time. The university also serves approximately 3,000 graduate and professional students, many of whom are enrolled in health sciences programs including nursing, public health, allied health professions, medicine, and pharmacy. Although most students are from the university’s

| 9

1 Overview of the University

10 | ETSU QEP

historical 15-county service region in East Tennessee, the university attracts students from 40 states and more than 60 countries. Approximately 80% of all ETSU undergraduate and graduate students receive Title IV federal financial aid. Nearly a quarter of the university’s undergraduate students are age 25 or over; about half are first-generation college students.

As of fall 2011 the university employed 866 full-time faculty members, approximately 76% of whom held terminal degrees. In addition to their teaching duties, ETSU’s faculty performs countless hours of service to the region, the larger world and their professions, and they are actively involved in research and creative activity.

Although INtopFORM invites participation by all members of the university, it focuses chiefly on undergraduate education. ETSU’s undergraduate environment strongly supports an emphasis on information fluency.

1.3 The Undergraduate Environment

East Tennessee State University affirms the value of a liberal education. ETSU’s faculty and staff seek to encourage and enable all undergraduate students, regardless of their fields of study, to:

• apply the standards of reasoned argument to what they read and hear, write and say;

• engage in life-long learning and personal growth;• gain greater insight into their lives and the world in

which they live;• resolve conflicts nonviolently and solve problems creatively, often in collaboration with others;• appreciate cultural diversity and respect people with

viewpoints different from their own;• be responsible, enlightened, active citizens; and • find joy, meaning and fulfillment in their lives and

help others do the same.Every ETSU employee plays an essential part in helping our students experience these benefits of an undergraduate education, because whatever our role—faculty, staff or administrator—we are all educators.

The university is committed to helping every undergraduate student stay in college, succeed in college, and graduate.

This commitment is especially important in light of the demographics of ETSU’s undergraduate population, which includes significant numbers of first-generation students and financial aid recipients. Examples of recent initiatives supporting student success include the following:

• ETSU’s Center for Academic Achievement opened in fall 2010 and offers comprehensive, one-stop shop tutoring in a variety of subjects, as well as

secure proctoring of online tests. Academic departments may use these proctoring services to

assess program learning outcomes, and individual faculty members may choose to have their course exams proctored by the center.

• The Academic Alert program enables ETSU faculty to send information about undergraduate students who are academically at-risk to professional

advisors, who contact the students and refer them to support services when appropriate.

• In fall 2012 a new learning support program providing individualized, concurrent support for

at-risk students taking general education courses, replaced the previous developmental studies pro-gram.

• The university piloted the First-Year Initiative (FYI), a new academic coaching program for new students, in fall 2012.

• As part of a thriving undergraduate research program ETSU faculty collaborate with students on

research and creative projects. For instance, in April 2012 ETSU’s annual Jay Boland

Undergraduate Research Symposium featured more than 70 research studies, visual arts displays and performances that were the products of

faculty-student collaboration.

1.4 Information Fluency and ETSU’s Undergraduate Environment

ETSU places special emphasis on five competencies essential for undergraduate students’ professional success, satisfying personal lives and responsible citizenship—critical thinking, information technology, mathematics, oral communication, and writing (see C.S. 3.5.1). The intersection of these competencies with information fluency is evident.

| 11

“Energy and persistence conquer all things.”

Benjamin Franklin

12 | ETSU QEP

Undergraduate students develop these competencies in general education courses and in their majors, as well as in information technology-intensive, oral communication-intensive, and writing-intensive courses that satisfy across-the-curriculum requirements. They have many opportunities to apply and refine these skills in co-curricular activities. ETSU’s Sherrod library promotes information literacy skills through both online and on-ground instructional support. In proposing INtopFORM as our QEP the university affirms the importance of information fluency for all of our students, and we acknowledge the need and the opportunity to improve our students’ ability to seek, use and communicate information. As discussed in the next section of this document, feedback from faculty, staff, students, and alumni shows that the university community values information fluency, and institutional assessment data reveal a need and an opportunity for improvement. ETSU’s Quality Enhancement Plan reflects our collective desire to help undergraduate students, and indeed all members of the university, achieve excellence in seeking, using and communicating information, so we are truly “INtopFORM.”

| 13

2 Selecting INtopFORM

A Quality Enhancement Plan presents a rare and valuable opportunity to address a need relevant to an entire institution over a sustained period. To take advantage of this opportunity, East Tennessee State University pursued a deliberate, inclusive process for identifying the theme of its QEP. The selection process engaged all of the university’s key stakeholders, including faculty, staff, undergraduate and graduate students, alumni, and community leaders. Institutional assessments of student learning and engagement also affirm the selection of INtopFORM as appropriate and timely for ETSU.

2.1 Overview of the QEP Selection and Development Process

ETSU pursued a careful, comprehensive process for selecting INtopFORM as the theme of its QEP. The process engaged all of the university’s key stakeholders, including faculty, staff, undergraduate and graduate students, alumni, and community leaders. A series of committees developed the INtopFORM theme and implementation plan. Each committee actively sought input from the university community through strategies including electronic surveys, meetings, retreats, and interviews. Table 1 provides an overview of the selection

14 | ETSU QEP

Table 1: Overview of the QEP Theme Selection and Development ProcessDate Action ParticipantsFall 2010-Spring 2011

QEP Theme Committee explores opportunities for improving student success at ETSU

Committee members: Faculty, staff, undergraduate and graduate students, alumni, and community representatives

Spring 2011 QEP Theme Committee invites university community to propose ideas for QEP; 51 ideas submitted

All ETSU students, faculty and staff; alumni and community leaders

May 2, 2011 QEP Theme Selection Committee submits its reportSummer 2011 QEP Theme Follow-Up Committee develops two proposals:

• INtopFORM: Enhancing Information Competence • Drawing Value from Diversity

Committee members: Faculty and administrators

September 13-October 20, 2011

SACS Leadership Team invites university community to respond to proposals:

• Nearly 1000 respondents completed the survey• Nearly 70 respondents express willingness to work on the

development of the next QEP• Respondents preferred the information competence theme by a

nearly two-to-one margin

Undergraduate, graduate and professional students; faculty; staff; alumni and community

November 4, 2011 SACS Leadership Team agrees that the next QEP will address information fluency

Leadership team members: President, vice-presidents, selected vice-provosts, and SACS liaison

December 2011-May 2012

QEP Development Team drafts implementation and assessment plan

Committee members: Faculty, staff, undergraduate and graduate students

June 6, 2012 President Brian Noland hosts INtopFORM retreat to discuss draft plan

University administrators, faculty and QEP Development Team

Summer 2012 INtopFORM Writing Team writes the QEP report to be submitted to SACS

Selected QEP Development Team members

August 15, 2012 INtopFORM Writing Team completes draft reportSeptember 1–October 1, 2012

University community comments on draft report Undergraduate, graduate and profes-sional students; faculty and staff

December 1, 2012 QEP Writing Team completes final draft of reportDecember 13, 2012 University Planning Committee endorses plan Committee members: Administrators,

faculty, staff, and studentsDecember 13, 2012 SACS Leadership Team endorses plan Leadership team members: President,

vice-presidents, selected vice-provosts, and SACS liaison

December 21, 2012 President Noland reviews and approves reportJanuary 10, 2013 ETSU submits report to SACS-COC

2.2 Phases of the Selection Process

Fall 2010-Spring 2011: QEP Theme Committee. The theme selection process commenced in fall 2010, when Provost Bert Bach charged a QEP Theme Committee with developing proposals for consideration. The committee included representatives of all of ETSU’s constituencies. In

and development process; descriptions of each phase of the process follow the table.

| 15

Table 2: QEP Theme Committee MembershipName DepartmentGordon Anderson College of Arts and SciencesAndy Czuchry, Chair College of Business and TechnologyAlison Deadman Department of MusicSteve Dixon ETSU AlumnusJeff Gold Department of Philosophy and HumanitiesLouie Gump Community LeaderChad Hall Student Government AssociationMarie Jones Faculty Senate, Sherrod LibraryAngela Lewis Curriculum and InstructionLeigh Lewis College of PharmacySteve Marshall Department of CommunicationWendy Nehring College of NursingRick Osborn School of Continuing Studies and Academic OutreachRob Pack College of Public HealthCharles Patton Staff SenateWil Sterchi Graduate and Professional Student Association

In fall 2010 the QEP Theme Committee reviewed institutional assessment data, ETSU’s newly defined strategic priorities for 2010-15, and literature on enhancing student success. These studies led the committee to identify two guiding principles for the university’s QEP: connectedness of students, faculty and staff and a holistic approach to learning.

To elicit theme suggestions from the entire university community, in spring 2011 the QEP Theme Committee invited faculty, staff, students, and alumni, as well as community leaders, to propose possible ideas for themes. Individuals or groups submitted ideas via a Zoomerang survey which the committee discussed. The committee then processed the ideas, selected three which seemed especially promising, and developed each into a theme proposal. On May 2, 2011, the committee presented the following proposals to the Provost, the Vice President for Health Affairs, ETSU’s SACS Liaison, and the Vice Provost for Undergraduate

particular, the active participation of a community leader (Mr. Louis Gump) and an ETSU alumnus (Mr. Stephen Dixon) on a university committee developing a major curricular initiative was comparatively novel for ETSU, and most welcome. Table 2 presents the committee membership.

16 | ETSU QEP

Education: 1) mentoring, 2) experiential learning and 3) development of knowledge and skills through collaboration. In reviewing the theme proposals, it was evident that all three represented powerful engines for driving improvements in student learning. The QEP Theme Committee had helped the university identify valuable resources for improving student learning; what remained was to determine the particular domains of learning and associated learning outcomes to which these resources could be applied. In the meeting on May 2nd it was agreed that a successor committee would explore this question.

Summer 2011: QEP Theme Follow-Up Committee. In late spring 2011 the Provost charged a team of faculty recognized as outstanding teachers with the task of developing two or more proposals that identified specific learning domains to which the work of the QEP Theme Committee could be applied. Table 3 presents the committee membership.

Table 3: QEP Theme Follow-Up Committee MembershipName Area DepartmentChris Dula College of Arts and Sciences PsychologyAmy Johnson School of Continuing Studies and Academic OutreachMarie Jones University LibrariesBill Kirkwood Office of the ProvostStephen Marshall College of Arts and Sciences CommunicationKelly Price College of Business and Technology Management and MarketingJustin Sytsma College of Arts and Sciences Philosophy

During summer 2011 the committee developed two specific proposals that drew upon the work of the QEP Theme Committee and identified specific goals to which that work could be applied—Drawing Value from Diversity and INtopFORM. Both themes built upon university assessment data and addressed major opportunities for improving student learning. In August 2011 the committee presented these proposals to ETSU’s SACS Leadership Team.

Fall 2011: Selection of the QEP Theme. In September 2011 the SACS Leadership Team invited all faculty, staff and students to attend a presentation of the two proposals. The meeting culminated in an invitation to participate in a

| 17

Table 4: Summary of Responses to QEP Proposal Survey, Fall 2011ITF=INtopFORM; DVFD=Drawing Value from Diversity

Proposal acceptable? Preference (if any)?Respondent Type ITF DVFD ITF DVFD None

# % # % # % # % % # %%ETSU Faculty 194 20% 169 87% 130 67% 114 59% 27% 27 14%ETSU Staff 225 23% 190 84% 140 62% 129 57% 25% 39 17%ETSU Undergraduate Student

329 34% 268 81% 196 60% 132 40% 27% 108 33%

ETSU Graduate or Professional Student

116 12% 93 80% 74 64% 56 48% 39% 15 13%

ETSU Alumni 100 10% 87 87% 46 46% 66 66% 22% 12 12%TOTAL 964 100% 807 84% 586 61% 497 52% 23% 201 21%

university-wide survey to select the proposal that would become ETSU’s QEP. The survey invited respondents to indicate whether each of the two proposals was acceptable and which of the proposals they favored. Repeated emails from the Leadership Team encouraging participation in the survey yielded high levels of response. Nearly one thousand individuals, representing students, faculty, staff, and alumni, completed the survey. Most survey respondents indicated support for both proposals. However, a majority preferred the information fluency proposal.

Comments from the survey also affirmed the selection of INtopFORM. Table 5 includes examples of the comments made by survey respondents.

18 | ETSU QEP

Table 5: Selected comments from QEP Proposal Survey, Fall 2011Constituency Group Comments:Alumni The ability and desire to seek, find and digest reliable information in the world today is

essential given the large amount and varying quality of available information. A trained information seeker will not only be able to locate reliable information, but will also be interested in reviewing diverse viewpoints. The value proposition from the INtopFORM proposal not only matches, but beats the DVFD proposal in utility in the academic envi-ronment as well as in personal and professional functions.

Faculty INtopFORM becomes a more effective proposal by recognizing and emphasizing that it can and should incorporate diversity. Human knowing is organized into hierarchies as follows: data, information, knowledge, and wisdom (lowest to highest). We are now be-ginning to recognize that we live in an age of multiple and competing sets of knowledge. Our goal can be to develop citizens who seek wisdom by understanding conflicting sets of knowledge. Such a framework honors and incorporates diversity.

Staff Although both are worthy proposals, enhancing information competence is a more critical priority at this point in the organization and operation of the university today and for the future.

Given that information is now available at the speed of light in numerous forms, it is proving to be a challenge to keep abreast of accessing and managing it all. This proposal seems to be an obvious choice, not only for students, but for the public at large. I would welcome the opportunity to broaden as well as sharpen my fact-finding knowledge.

Undergraduate Students I feel that enhancing information competence is important to every student at East Tennessee State University along with any other college. As students, we are the future physicians, attorneys, engineers, etc., and we should be more than competent in as-sessing information.

Graduate Students I appreciate and see the importance of both proposals. I prefer INtopFORM because of its focus on critical thinking. That is needed before one can effectively deal with diversity.

With 30 plus years in human resource management, I found diversity in the workplace important, but more important was the need to fortify employees’ ability to gather information, boil it down to useful information and then communicate the result to other employees who could benefit from said information.

In late October 2011 the SACS Leadership Team recommended to President Paul E. Stanton, Jr., that INtopFORM be the theme of ETSU’s Quality Enhancement Plan. The President concurred, and work began on developing the plan to implement and assess INtopFORM.

2.3 Phases of the Development Process

Spring 2012: QEP Development Team. Throughout spring 2012 a team comprising outstanding faculty from across the institution, as well as representatives from Student Affairs, and undergraduate and graduate students, developed the plan by which ETSU would implement and assess INtopFORM. The team’s membership was as follows:

| 19

The team met weekly throughout the spring term to craft the implementation and assessment plan for INtopFORM. At a retreat on January 27, 2012, team members drafted a goal for INtopFORM and related learning outcomes that defined successful accomplishment of the goal. Following the retreat, members of the team met with each of the university’s academic deans to present the learning outcomes and request her or his ideas regarding implementation of the QEP. The team also reviewed the QEPs at other institutions to learn about implementation and assessment strategies. By the close of the spring 2012 term, the team had created an extended outline of the implementation and assessment plan. Team members agreed that it was time to present the plan to key campus stakeholders and seek their thoughts about a number of matters related to it. To this end the team asked ETSU’s new president, Dr. Brian Noland, whose appointment began upon the retirement of Dr. Paul Stanton, to host a day-long INtopFORM retreat.

Table 6: QEP Development Team Committee MembershipName Area DepartmentKarin Bartoszuk College of Education Teaching and LearningLana Becker College of Business and Technology AccountancySally Blowers College of NursingChristy Buckles Graduate StudentShirley Cherry College of Clinical and

Rehabilitative Health SciencesAllied Health Sciences

Cheri Clavier Academic Affairs Assessment and TeachingScott Contreras-Koterbay Honors College Art and DesignRenee Couch Student Affairs Student HousingMichael Fernando Undergraduate StudentNick Hagemeier College of Pharmacy Pharmacy PracticeAmy Johnson School of Continuing Studies

and Academic OutreachMarie Jones University LibrariesSamantha Jones Undergraduate StudentBill Kirkwood Academic AffairsTony Pittarese College of Business and Technology Computer and Information SciencesTom Schacht College of Medicine/Faculty Senate PsychiatryKen Silver College Public Health Environmental HealthJustin Sytsma College of Arts and Sciences Philosophy and HumanitiesLogan Vess Graduate StudentCarla Warner Student Affairs Adult, Commuter, and Transfer Services

20 | ETSU QEP

June 2012: INtopFORM Retreat. On June 6, 2012, Dr. Noland led a retreat at ETSU’s Valleybrook campus attended by the university’s vice presidents, deans, other selected administrators, faculty, SACS Leadership Team, and the QEP Development Team. The aims of the retreat were to present the aims of the draft plan, to solicit comments and suggestions for improvement, to seek attendees’ help in resolving some unanswered questions concerning implementation and assessment, and to reach agreement about the immediate path going forward. The retreat organizers also sought to share and multiply their enthusiasm for INtopFORM. In addition to hearing lively presentations by faculty and staff members of the QEP Development Team, retreat attendees received Hershey bars in INtopFORM wrappers featuring the INtopFORM logo and an “ingredients list” of information fluency attributes.

Summer 2012: INtopFORM Writing Team. In summer 2012 a writing team comprising members of the QEP Development Team wrote a near-final draft of the INtopFORM implementation and assessment plan. Table 7 presents the membership of the team. The writing team consulted throughout the summer with university decision-makers including the SACS Leadership Team. The writing team completed the draft in mid-August.

2.4 Final Campus Review and Adoption of the Plan

At the university’s annual faculty and staff convocations in fall 2012 (on August 24th and October 2nd, respectively), President Noland invited all employees to be “INtopFORM.”

Table 7: QEP Writing Team MembershipName Area DepartmentShirley Cherry College of Clinical and

Rehabilitative Health SciencesAllied Health Sciences

Cheri Clavier Assessment and TeachingAmy Johnson School of Continuing Studies

and Academic OutreachMarie Jones University LibrariesBill Kirkwood Academic Affairs

“Information is the oxygen of the modern age. It seeps through the walls topped by barbed wire, it wafts across the electrified borders.”

-Ronald Reagan

| 21

On August 24th ETSU faculty, staff and students were e-mailed a draft copy of the plan along with a survey inviting their comments. In addition, the chair of the QEP Development Team visited the staff senate, faculty senate, student government association, and deans council and sought their ideas concerning the plan. The chair and other members of the development team also accepted invitations to meet with faculty in several of ETSU’s colleges to discuss the plan. The development team found feedback from the survey and information gathered at meetings with campus constituencies very useful in refining the plan. For instance, team members learned that, although they had grown quite comfortable with the term “information fluency,” communication with the university about the plan should use more familiar language—“seeking, using and communicating information.” We revised both the INtopFORM communication campaign and the QEP document accordingly. Regarding the latter, this document uses the term “information fluency” and the phrase “seeking, using and communicating information” interchangeably.

The final version of the plan was completed early in December 2012. It was then endorsed by ETSU’s University Planning Committee, which oversees strategic planning, and the SACS Leadership Team. President Noland subsequently approved submission of the plan to SACS-COC.

Selection of INtopFORM as ETSU’s Quality Enhancement Plan thus emerged from a broad-based, highly participative process. It was also informed by several assessments of student learning.

22 | ETSU QEP

| 23

3 Assessment Data Supporting Adoption of INtopFORM

The results of several longstanding assessments of undergraduate student learning and engagement at ETSU reveal a compelling need and a timely opportunity to enhance students’ information fluency. These assessments evaluate four competencies essential for every undergraduate student’s professional success, personal fulfillment and active citizenship:

• information technology• critical thinking• oral communication• writing

The university’s response to comprehensive standard 3.5.1 provides detailed information regarding student attainment of these competencies. The following discussion presents selected findings from recent assessments that provide particularly compelling evidence of the relevance and timeliness of an information fluency initiative at ETSU. The results of the 2011 National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), the third administration of the survey at ETSU, also demonstrate the significance of INtopFORM.

“True genius resides in the capacity for evaluation of uncertain, hazardous, and conflicting information.”

Winston Churchill

24 | ETSU QEP

3.1 Assessment of Students’ Information Technology Competence

ETSU assesses senior students’ information technology proficiency on a three-year cycle by administering an online, performance-based proficiency exam to a sample of seniors. Table 8 presents selected data from the most recent assessment, conducted in 2009-10. Only a third of ETSU seniors achieved passing scores (>70%) on items testing internet and online library skills; only 10% passed the section on use of spreadsheets software (Microsoft Excel). In reviewing these results ETSU’s General Education Advisory Council concluded that students’ poor performance on these parts of the test was due in part to the release of a new version of Microsoft Excel (2007). The students tested had previously learned Excel version 2003 in CSCI 1100, Using Information Technology, the course in which most ETSU students acquire basic information technology skills. Nonetheless, the data indicate a compelling need to strengthen elements of information fluency—seeking, analyzing and displaying information.

Table 8: Senior Students’ Attainment of Selected Performance Expectations in Information Technology, 2009-10 (N=197)Passing score on subtest>70% of items answered correctly

Performance Expectation Mean Score

% Students Passing Subtest

Students are able to access electronic databases and search for and retrieve valid information from those sources, including sites available via the internet and databases available through ETSU's library system.

69% 33%

Students master the necessary components of spreadsheet software that will enable the student to manipulate and present numeric information visually, create formulas and perform what-if analysis to solve problems relating to the student’s major or career choice.

40% 10%

Students master the necessary components of presentation software that will enable the student to design effective presentations incorporating multimedia, audio, video and graphics.

80% 83%

| 25

3.2 Assessment of Students’ Ability to Understand and Evaluate Evidence and Arguments

Nearly all ETSU seniors take the California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST) to fulfill a graduation requirement mandated by the state of Tennessee. The university uses results of the CCTST to evaluate students’ ability to understand and evaluate evidence and arguments, including information presented graphically. As presented in Table 9, CCTST results from 2006-07 through 2010-11 reinforce the need to strengthen students’ skills in these areas.

Table 9: Senior Students’ Performance on the California Critical Thinking Skills Test,2006-07 through 2010-11

AY NMax.

Possible Score

MeanTotal Score S.D. Median

Interquartile Range25% 75%

2011-12 1859 33 17.6 4.8 17 14 22010-11 1672 33 17.5 4.7 17 14 212009-10 1512 33 17.3 4.7 17 14 212008-09 1592 33 17.2 5.0 17 14 202007-08 1814 33 17.7 4.8 17 14 212006-07 1429 33 17.4 5.2 17 14 21

ETSU’s institutional performance on the CCTST in 2010-11 ranked it at the 59th percentile in the vendor-supplied national reference group (four-year colleges and universities), a result consistent with the university’s “traditionally selective” (per the Carnegie classification system) undergraduate admissions policy. Nonetheless, a score of 17.5 out of 33 is not a cause for celebration. It suggests there is ample room for improvement in our students’ ability to understand and evaluate information, especially with regard to its evidentiary value.

3.3 Assessment of Students’ Oral and Written Communication

Information fluency and oral and written communication are thoroughly intertwined. ETSU assesses these competencies

26 | ETSU QEP

annually in the first year of college, through course-embedded assessments in selected general education courses, and on three-year cycles in the senior year, by evaluating oral presentations and samples of papers of senior students. The first-year assessments use standardized scoring rubrics based on criteria provided by the Tennessee Board of Regents and refined by ETSU faculty; rubrics for senior-year assessments were developed by the university’s oral communication proficiency and writing proficiency committees. Tables 10 and 11 highlight recent oral communication data of special interest in developing INtopFORM; tables 12 and 13 present findings of interest from recent writing assessments.

Table 11: Senior Students’ Attainment of Selected Oral Communication Outcomes,Fall 2010 and Spring 2011 (N=264)

Performance ExpectationPercentages of Students Attaining Performance Ratings

Excellent Very Good Good Fair PoorStudents are able to correctly cite evidence in their oral presentations.

0.7% 3.9% 53.6% 36.6% 5.2%

Students incorporate evidence in an effective manner.

0.4% 6.1% 37.8% 46.9% 8.8%

Table 10: Student Attainment of Selected Oral Communication Outcomesin SPCH 1300 (General Speech), SPCH 2300 (Public Speaking), and SPCH 2320 (Argumentation and Debate), Spring 2011 (N=730)

Performance ExpectationPercentages of Students Attaining Performance Ratings

Superior Satisfactory UnsatisfactoryStudents are able to use evidence of sufficient quality at appropriate points in the speech.

9.8% 52.9% 37.3%

Students are able to correctly cite evidence and use a sufficient quantity of evidence.

10% 37.8% 52.2%

Although increasing students’ information fluency should improve their overall competence as speakers, the data cited in the preceding tables highlight the need to address two aspects of information fluency—using information to achieve one’s purposes as a speaker and meeting one’s obligation to identify sources of information. As described in ETSU’s response to C.S. 3.5.1, the director of oral communication assessment in SPCH 1300, 2300 and 2320 and the instructors of these courses have already taken steps to address the second of these needs, including conducting an empirical study of student attitudes toward source citation. However,

| 27

more work is needed, not only to correct deficiencies, but to enable undergraduate students to achieve excellence in oral communication and the use of information. INtopFORM is well timed to achieve these goals.

Assessments of student writing support similar conclusions, as Tables 12 and 13 demonstrate.Table 12: Student Attainment of Selected Writing Outcomes in ENGL 1020 (Critical Thinking and Argumentation), Spring 2011 (N=200 Research Papers)

Performance ExpectationPercentages of Students Attaining Performance Ratings

Excellent Satisfactory Needs Work PoorStudents are able to manage and coordinate basic information gathered from multiple sources.

2.5% 49% 36.0% 12.5%

Table 13: Senior Students’ Attainment of Selected Performance Expectations in Writing, 2009-10 (N=57; pilot for larger study conducted in 2011-12, data forthcoming fall 2012)

Performance ExpectationPercentages of Students Attaining Performance Ratings

Excellent Very Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory PoorStudents support their essays’ major points logically and reasonably with evidence or examples that are clearly explained in terms of the papers’ central purposes.

5% 31.5% 49% 12% 2%

The data presented in tables 12 and 13 disclose opportunities to improve the skillful use of information to support the purposes of essays and reports. Moreover, assessments of students’ ability to manage information from several sources are especially relevant to the aims of INtopFORM, which—as described in the next section of this document—seeks to enhance students’ ability to seek, use and communicate information from diverse sources.

3.4 Other Data: National Survey of Student Engagement

ETSU has administered the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) to freshman and senior students approximately every three years since spring 2006. Student responses to several NSSE items affirm the significance of an information fluency initiative at ETSU. Table 14 spotlights some of the most important findings from the most recent administration of the NSSE in spring 2011.

28 | ETSU QEP

Table 14: Responses of First-Year (FY) and Senior (SR) ETSU Students to Selected ItemsNational Survey of Student Engagement, Spring 2011Percentage of students who reported that . . . FY SRthey worked on a paper or project that required integrating ideas or information from various sources often or very often.

77% 87%

their coursework emphasizes synthesizing and organizing ideas, information, or experiences quite a bit or very much.

65% 75%

their coursework emphasizes making judgments about the value of information, arguments, or methods quite a bit or very much.

72% 74%

they examined the strengths and weaknesses of their own views on a topic or issue often or very often. 57% 62%their experience at ETSU has contributed to their knowledge, skills and personal development in thinking critically and analytically quite a bit or very much.

83% 88%

their experience at ETSU has contributed to their knowledge, skills and personal development in using computing and information technology quite a bit or very much.

83% 85%

their experience at ETSU has contributed to their knowledge, skills and personal development in learning effectively on their own quite a bit or very much.

72% 75%

their experience at ETSU has contributed to their knowledge, skills and personal development in solving complex real world problems quite a bit or very much.

57% 58%

It is telling that over 25% of first-year and senior ETSU students completing the NSSE in 2011 reported that they seldom or never “made judgments about the value of information, arguments, or methods” in courses they had taken in 2010-11. Even higher percentages—43% of first-year students and 38% of seniors—said they seldom or never examined the strengths and weaknesses of their views on an issue. INtopFORM seeks to make the critical evaluation of information and ideas a hallmark of undergraduate education at ETSU.

| 29

4 Goals of INtopFORM

The goal of ETSU’s Quality Enhancement Plan is to equip and motivate students to excel in seeking, using and communicating information. The motto of our QEP succinctly captures the spirit of the plan: “Insightful questions, informed answers.” The name of the plan—INtopFORM—expresses our belief that competence, although desirable, is not sufficient; the aim is to help our students achieve excellence.

ETSU’s Quality Enhancement Plan falls within the domain of information literacy, first defined by Zurowski in 1974. The Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) defines information literacy as the ability to “recognize when information is needed” and the ability to “locate, evaluate and use effectively the needed information” (ACRL, 2000). The ACRL standards for information literacy include the ability to ascertain the scope of needed information, access that information in an effective and efficient manner, critically evaluate information and its sources, incorporate the information into their knowledge base, use it to complete a specific project or purpose, and act responsibly with respect to economic legal and social issues related to information use (ACRL, 2000).

William Miller (1992) observed, however, that the term “literacy” calls to mind the remediation of illiteracy and may

“A popular government without popular information or the means of acquiring it is but a prologue to a farce, or a tragedy, or perhaps both.”

James Madison

30 | ETSU QEP

therefore imply basic proficiency. Because INtopFORM seeks to promote excellence in seeking, using and communicating information, we prefer the term “information fluency.” The University of Central Florida (UCF) used this phrase to describe the aims of its Quality Enhancement Plan (2006). It defined information fluency as “the ability to perform effectively in an information-rich and technology-intensive environment” (UCF, 2006). Information fluency comprises three skills sets—information literacy, technology literacy and critical thinking (UCF, 2006).

The scholarship of information literacy and information fluency asserts that the wise use of information is essential for students’ success in college and beyond. Livingstone, VanCouvering and Thumin (2007) reported that such skills have economic benefits for individuals and society, because people who excel in seeking, using and communicating information make greater contributions in the workplace and are wiser consumers. Reflecting this view, in 1991 the U.S. Department of Labor stated that competencies for all entry-level employees should include acquiring information, using information, and working with a variety of technologies (SCANS report, 1991b). A growing consensus has emerged that information skills are essential in the workplace (e.g., American Management Association, 2010; Zhang, 2010; Goad, 2002; Partnership for 21st Century Skills).

Livingstone, VanCouvering and Thumin observed that information fluency promotes democracy by enabling citizens to make more informed decisions about societal and political issues. They also argued that such individuals are life-long learners who report more personal fulfillment. In the words of the ACRL, “information literate people are those who have learned how to learn . . . . They are people prepared for lifelong learning” (American Library Association, 1989).

Information fluency is thus vital to undergraduate students’ professional, personal and civic lives. Moreover, because collecting, using and communicating information are central to the work of everyone at ETSU and vital for the success of our university, INtopFORM will promote excellence in information fluency across the university. The plan will invite participation by all members of the university community, and it will recognize achievements by ETSU students, faculty, staff, and alumni.

| 31

4.1 DefiningStudentLearning Outcomes

Having set the ambitious goal of helping our students excel in information fluency, ETSU has defined six abilities that define excellence. Table 15 displays these learning outcomes.

Table 15: INtopFORM Learning OutcomesQUESTIONING Students ask questions that facilitate the solution of problems and the pursuit of opportunities. SEEKING Students locate or create information to accomplish their purposes.EVALUATING Students apply critical thinking skills in evaluating sources, information and search processes. USING Students assemble and synthesize information to accomplish their purposes.COMMUNICATING Students communicate information effectively.RECOGNIZING Students recognize the responsibilities and consequences related to information ethics and intellectual property.

These learning outcomes emerged from extended discus-sions among the members of the QEP Development Team, which reviewed the information literacy standards of the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) and adjusted their language to create outcomes applicable to all disciplines at ETSU. Table 16 shows how the ACRL standards and the INtopFORM learning outcomes align.

Table 16: Alignment of ACRL Standards and INtopFORM Learning OutcomesACRL INtopFORM

Determine the extent of information needed QUESTIONING: Students ask questions that facilitate the solution of problems and the pursuit of opportunities.

Access the needed information effectively and efficiently SEEKING: Students locate or create information to accomplish their purposes.

Evaluate information and its sources critically EVALUATING: Students apply critical thinking skills in evaluating sources, information and search processes.

Incorporate selected information into one’s knowledge baseUse information effectively to accomplish a specific purpose USING: Students assemble and synthesize information to accomplish

their purposes.

COMMUNICATING: Students communicate information effectively.Understand the economic, legal and social issues surrounding the use of information, and access and use information ethically and legally

RECOGNIZING: Students recognize the responsibilities and conse-quences related to information ethics and intellectual property.

The scholarly literature also reinforces the importance of the INtopFORM learning outcomes.

32 | ETSU QEP

Questioning. Asking appropriate questions often confounds students. In a survey of over 83,000 undergraduate students, respondents indicated that questioning, defining and seeking are the most difficult part of the process (Head & Eisenberg, 2010). The most difficult step was “getting started” (84% of respondents), with “defining a topic” (62%) and “filtering through irrelevant results” (61%) close behind. Interviews with survey respondents suggested that “students lacked the re-search acumen for framing an inquiry in the digital age where information abounds and intellectual discovery was paradoxi-cally overwhelming for them” (p. 3).

Seeking. A study at Illinois Wesleyan University found that “the majority of students . . . exhibited significant difficulties that ranged across nearly every aspect of the search pro-cess” (Asher & Duke, 2011, p. 73). In our experience these difficulties are widespread among students. Thus INtopFORM encourages students to be persistent and resourceful in seek-ing information. The plan is informed by Zimmerman’s (2000) notion of “self-regulated learners,” who “proactively seek out information when needed and take the necessary steps to master it.” When such students “encounter obstacles . . . they find a way to succeed” (Zimmerman, 2000, p. 4). They integrate the components of their information-gathering with each other and with their existing knowledge (Elliot, McGregor & Gable, 1999; Pintrich & De Groot, 1990).

Evaluating. As access to information increases, evaluating information thoughtfully becomes even more important. Yet paradoxically, in an information-rich environment people tend to use materials they find quickly and consider “good enough” (Connaway, Dickey & Radford, 2011). Several studies indi-cate that students’ evaluation of materials is, at best, cursory (e.g. Head & Eisenberg, 2010; Ivanitskaya, Boyle & Casey, 2006; Walraven, Brand-Gruwel, & Boshuizen, 2009; Asher & Duke, 2011). Albitz (2007) concluded, “In order to know what to question and to understand variable arguments, students need to know where to find the best information and how to evaluate both the contents and source in order to weigh evi-dence and deduce conclusions” (p. 101). Encouraging and enabling ETSU students to evaluate information critically is a vital aim of INtopFORM.

| 33

Using. A hallmark of excellence in information fluency is the ability to synthesize and coordinate complex information from diverse sources and perspectives. Bruce (1999) argued that collaborative learning is an important strategy in helping students develop this ability, because information fluency is a social process. She urged universities to develop curricula that promote students’ synthesis of information through “social collaboration and collegial interdependence” rather than in isolation. Drawing upon research by ETSU’s QEP theme com-mittee in 2010-11, which emphasized collaborative learning, INtopFORM will engage both faculty and students in such learning.

Communicating. Employers expect college graduates to have strong written and oral communication skills (Cappel, 2002; Hart Research Associates, 2010; Krapels & Davis, 2003; National Commission on Writing, 2004). However, Arum and Roska’s (2011) research indicated that that not only do many students lack communication skills when they enter col-lege, these skills increase only incrementally over the course of their college careers. Moreover, longitudinal work showed that graduates who had previously not performed well on assessments of synthesizing and communicating information were more likely to be unemployed, living with their parents, and amassing debt (Arum, Cho, Kim & Roska, 2012). By im-proving students’ ability to communicate information effective-ly, INtopFORM will position ETSU graduates for professional and personal success.

Recognizing. Several reports highlight increases in plagia-rism (Perry, 2010; Baruchson-Arbib & Yaari, 2004; Scanlon & Neumann, 2002), digital piracy and other computer crimes (Cronan, Foltz & Jones, 2006; Dashori, 2011). INtopFORM’s focus on recognizing one’s ethical obligations when seeking, using and communicating information is both appropriate and timely.

4.2 Advancing ETSU’s Mission and Strategic Priorities

ETSU’s Quality Enhancement Plan advances the foremost aim of the university’s mission—preparing students “to become

34 | ETSU QEP

productive, enlightened citizens who actively serve their communities and our world.” INtopFORM will equip ETSU graduates to succeed personally and professionally, and it will enable them to make valuable contributions to their communities, the nation and our world. INtopFORM also supports two of the university’s strategic priorities for 2010-15:

• ETSU will increase persistence to graduation and the number of graduates while maintaining high academic standards.

• ETSU will foster a university community that enhances and supports diversity of people, thought

and culture.

The Complete College Tennessee Act of 2010 charges all public institutions of higher education in the state with dramatically increasing the number of Tennesseans with post-secondary degrees. ETSU’s strong support of this goal is evident in the first of these strategic priorities. By promoting the ability to seek, use and communicate information, INtopFORM will equip our students to succeed and indeed excel in college. More importantly, however, the QEP advances academic quality at ETSU. In seeking to increase the level of educational attainment in Tennessee, we must also preserve and indeed raise academic standards. INtopFORM will play a vital role in enhancing the academic excellence of ETSU students.

By encouraging students to seek, use and communicate information from multiple and varied sources INtopFORM reflects ETSU’s commitment to diversity of people, cultures and thought. Furthermore, by promoting attitudes of curiosity, disciplined skepticism and independence of thought INtopFORM will equip our students to participate fully in the life of a diverse community. In responding to the QEP proposal survey one alumnus observed, “A trained information seeker will not only be able to locate reliable information, but will also be interested in reviewing diverse viewpoints.” Embracing diversity is indeed an essential element of information fluency.

| 35

5 Implementing INtopFORM

ETSU is indebted to the work of other institutions in promoting information literacy or fluency and the related themes of critical thinking and writing. We studied the following plans when designing our plan for implementing INtopFORM:

• Lincoln Memorial University• Old Dominion University• Southern Wesleyan Univeristy• Trinity University• University of Central Florida• University of Houston• University of North Georgia• University of North Texas Health Science Center

INtopFORM adopts a fourfold strategy to promote excellence in seeking, using and communicating information. The plan comprises the following components:

• introducing INtopFORM skills in the first year of college,• enhancing mastery of INtopFORM learning outcomes in programs of study,• sponsoring projects by individual faculty members

across the university, and• fostering an institutional culture of excellence.

“It’s not that I’m so smart, it’s just that I stay with problems longer.”

Albert Einstein

36 | ETSU QEP

The plan focuses on undergraduate education. However, it also encourages participation by all members of the univer-sity. The first two elements of the plan—introducing INtop-FORM skills in the first year of college and enhancing mastery of INtopFORM learning outcomes in programs of study—spe-cifically address undergraduate education. The remaining el-ements invite all faculty and all ETSU departments and offices to explore ways to help our students be “INtopFORM.”

5.1 Introducing INtopFORM Skills in the First Year of College

The first-year component of INtopFORM supports acquisition of basic seeking, using and communicating information skills early in undergraduate students’ college careers. This com-ponent includes the following elements:

Redesign of CSCI 1100, Using Information Technology. The Department of Computer and Information Sciences will revise CSCI 1100, currently titled Using Information Technology, so it addresses all of the INtopFORM learning outcomes and acquaints students with examples of excellence in seeking, using and communicating information. All ETSU students pursuing undergraduate degrees are required to demonstrate proficiency in using information technology by earning a passing grade on a proficiency exam or completing CSCI 1100. Nearly all freshmen choose the latter option, and many transfer students also take CSCI 1100. In AY 2013-14 ETSU’s computer science faculty will redesign CSCI 1100, as well as the proficiency exam, which parallels the final exam for CSCI 1100. The department will implement the redesign in AY 2014-15. Because more than 2,800 students enroll in CSCI 1100 each year, the redesigned course will introduce INtopFORM skills to more than 11,000 students over the life of the QEP.

Inclusion of INtopFORM outcomes in other courses taken in the first year. Faculty will revise longstanding assessments of general education competencies embedded in several courses typically taken in the first year to address INtopFORM outcomes. These courses include:

| 37

• ENGL 1010 (Critical Thinking and Argumentation), required for all students seeking undergraduate degrees; and

• SPCH 1300 (Introduction to Communication Studies), 2300 (Public Speaking) and 2320 (Argumentation and Debate), one of which is required for all students seeking undergraduate

degrees.

Many of the aims of INtopFORM are already inherent in these courses, and revising the assessments embedded in them to include INtopFORM outcomes will inform instructors’ efforts to improve student learning.

5.2 Enhancing INtopFORM Mastery in Programs of Study

The first-year elements of INtopFORM will acquaint students with basic skills in seeking, using and communicating information. However, the ultimate goal of INtopFORM is more ambitious—to promote excellence in these skills. Reaching this goal requires curricular implementation in the sophomore year and beyond. Following the example of Quality Enhancement Plans created by the University of Central Florida and Old Dominion University, ETSU will employ an invitational model in this part of the plan. We will annually invite academic departments and colleges to design and implement multi-year plans to enhance their students’ mastery of INtopFORM learning outcomes in selected undergraduate programs of study (majors or concentrations within majors). All colleges offering undergraduate degree programs will participate in INtopFORM, and at least 12 programs will join INtopFORM in each year of the plan. Over the life of the QEP at least 60 programs of study will participate.

In the first year of a program’s membership in the initiative, selected faculty in the program will begin exploring discipline-specific INtopFORM outcomes and teaching practices that promote INtopFORM skills by attending a summer conference (Appendix A). Drawing upon the work of the initial QEP theme committee (2010-11), which emphasized collaborative learning and experiential education, throughout

38 | ETSU QEP

the first year of involvement faculty will participate in learning communities facilitated by the director of INtopFORM. They will also learn how to use collaborative, experiential learning to promote the goals of INtopFORM.

As described in the Invitation to Participate (Appendix B), by the close of the first year each program of study will have completed the following tasks:

• creating a plan to help all students in the program attain the six INtopFORM learning outcomes;

• creating a protocol for assessing attainment of these outcomes by upper-division students in the

program, most often by using the INtopFORM assessment rubric (see Assessing INtopFORM) to evaluate student work in one or more designated upper-division course(s) or, with approval, by

collecting data using a locally developed test; and• collecting baseline assessment data using this protocol.

In the second year of participation programs of study will implement their plans and collect and report program-level assessment data. Implementation and assessment will then continue for the duration of INtopFORM (i.e., through 2017-18). We also expect that INtopFORM will lead to enduring changes in programs of study, which will persist after the QEP officially ends.

ETSU will support programs of study participating in INtopFORM by:

• providing one-time extra compensation for some or all faculty in the program of study (maximum $2,000 per faculty member, maximum $6,000 per program of study);

• conducting conferences and workshops to aid faculty in designing curricular projects and assessing INtopFORM learning outcomes;• facilitating faculty learning communities;• providing instructional resources for use in courses;

and• assisting with collection and analysis of INtopFORM

learning outcome data.

“Learning is not attained by chance; it must be soughtfor with ardor and diligence.”

Abigail Adams

| 39

In July 2012 President Noland sent the inaugural Invitation to Participate to the deans for distribution within their colleges. The following programs of study will participate in Year One of INtopFORM.

Table 17: Participating Programs of Study, INtopFORM, 2013-14College Department Program(s)Arts and Sciences Art and Design Art, B.F.A. (Studio Art concentration);

Art, B.A. (Art History concentration) Mathematics and Statistics Mathematics, B.S. (all concentrations)Philosophy and Humanities Philosophy, B.A., B.S. (all concentrations)Political Science, International Affairs, and Public Administration

Political Science, B.A., B.S.

Psychology Psychology, B.A., B.S. (all concentrations)Business and Technology Computer and Information Sciences Computing major (all concentrations)Clinical and Rehabilitative Health Sciences

Allied Health Sciences Allied Health, B.S. (Nutrition Concentration)Allied Health, B.S. (Radiography Concentration)

Continuing Studies Bachelor of General Studies (all concentrations)Education Counseling and Human Services Human Services, B.S.

Curriculum and Instruction Interdisciplinary Studies in Education, B.S. (all concentrations)

Kinesiology, Sport and Recreation Management Sport and Leisure Management, B.S. (all concentrations)Nursing Nursing, B.S.N.Public Health Environmental Health Environmental Health, B.S. (all concentrations)

These programs will create their plans and assessment pro-tocols and collect baseline data in AY 2013-14 and will begin implementation in AY 2014-15.

5.3 Sponsoring Projects by Faculty Across the University

INtopFORM Faculty Fellowships will provide another route for participation in ETSU’s efforts to promote excellence inseeking, using and communicating information. As compared to the programs of study initiative, in which a department or college seeks to enhance learning outcomes in an entire major or concentration, INtopFORM fellowships will support projects by individual faculty members. Such projects might include redesigning a course taken by many students, creating instructional resources for use by faculty across the institution, or delivering INtopFORM-related professional development activities for faculty.

40 | ETSU QEP

ETSU faculty in all colleges and programs (undergraduate, graduate and professional) may apply for INtopFORM Faculty Fellowships. Tenure and tenure-track faculty, clinical and research faculty, lecturers, adjunct faculty, post-retirement faculty, and emeritus faculty are eligible. ETSU will award 12 fellowships annually over the life of INtopFORM; by 2017-18 the university will have awarded 60 INtopFORM fellowships. In January 2013 we will issue the request for proposals (RFP) for AY 2013-14.

As described in the RFP (Appendix C), faculty fellows will:• complete projects that support INtopFORM goals;• attend INtopFORM workshops and meetings;• engage in peer mentoring or related activities as

appropriate;• assess INtopFORM outcomes of their projects; and• share information about their projects with others at

ETSU.

ETSU will support INtopFORM fellowships by providing honoraria of $2000 to faculty fellows, creating opportunities for collaboration among INtopFORM fellows, and facilitating the collection and analysis of assessment data.

5.4 Fostering an Institutional Culture of Excellence

Collecting, analyzing, using and communicating information are central to the work of everyone at ETSU. We will hope all members of the university community will strive to produce work that is “INtopFORM,” and ETSU will adopt several strategies to foster broad engagement in a culture of excellence.

Student Support and Engagement Projects. As described in the RFP (Appendix D), we will invite all university departments, offices and officially recognized organizations to conduct projects to promote students’ ability to seek, use and communicate information. Examples of projects might include creating programs to improve students’ career decision-mak-ing skills; enhancing ETSU’s longstanding undergraduate research program; and training student workers assigned to university administrative offices to produce effective data displays.

| 41

Each unit receiving a student support and engagement grant will:

• carry out a project that advances at least one INtopFORM learning outcome;• identify one or more individuals who will lead the

project and attend INtopFORM meetings;• assess project outcomes; and• share project outcomes with other INtopFORM participants and the larger university community.

ETSU will support participating units by providing one-time, $3000 grants to develop and implement projects. Grants may be used for any approved purpose, such as workshop expenses, supplies, guest speaker honoraria, technology purchases, temporary staff, or travel. Individuals leading support and engagement projects will be invited to participate in INtopFORM workshops and meetings and will have opportunities for peer mentoring and collaboration with other INtopFORM faculty and staff. The Office of Assessment and Teaching will help participating units collect and analyze INtopFORM learning outcome data.

The university will fund three student support and engagement projects every year for the life of the QEP. Ultimately, ETSU will fund 15 INtopFORM student support and engagement projects. In January 2013 we will issue the RFP for funding in AY 2013-14.

Direct Library Instruction. ETSU’s Sherrod Library will provide direct instruction on selected INtopFORM topics upon request for on-ground and online courses. It will also create or acquire online instructional modules on selected INtopFORM skills which instructors can then require students to complete. As described in the section on institutional capability to support the QEP, ETSU will hire an INtopFORM librarian to support these services.

INtopFORM Communication Plan. Successful Quality Enhancement Plans require enthusiastic participation by the entire university community. To this end President Noland established an INtopFORM communication team in July 2012. Table 18 presents its membership.

42 | ETSU QEP

The team’s charge was to introduce INtopFORM to the university community and the surrounding region in AY 2012-13. The communication campaign officially began at ETSU’s faculty and staff convocations on August 24 and October 2, 2012, respectively, when President Noland featured INtopFORM in his state of the university address, and convocation attendees received post-it notes bearing the INtopFORM logo. Immediately following the faculty convocation on August 24th all ETSU employees and students received a draft of the plan via email and a request to participate in a survey inviting their comments and suggestions.

The 2012-13 communication campaign includes videos created to generate interest in INtopFORM. The videos were featured on ETSU’s Internet homepage and are now available on the INtopFORM website (www.etsu.edu/intopform). The campaign also incorporates social media and print communications. Posts about INtopFORM appear on the university’s Facebook and Twitter pages, encouraging friends and followers to visit the INtopFORM website and learn more about the initiative. The print messages include INtopFORM posters featuring an INtopFORM Quick Response (QR) code, table tents in campus dining areas, and floor peels in various campus buildings.

A major part of the campaign occurred during ETSU’s 2012 Homecoming and parent and family weekend on November 2 and 3, 2012. On November 2nd the university conducted a news conference at which President Noland announced the

Table 18. INtopFORM Communication TeamName AreaKaren King, Chair Office of E-LearningJane Jones Office of the PresidentJoe Sherlin Division of Student AffairsJoe Smith Office of University RelationsMichaele Laws Academic Technology SupportAdam Greever Academic Technology Support Jennifer Clements Academic Technology SupportBarbara Mason Office of Intercollegiate AthleticsKathryn Prendergast Undergraduate StudentAmy Johnson QEP Development Team

“I find that a great part of the information I have was ac-quired by looking up some-thing and finding something else on the way.”

-Franklin P. Adams

| 43

creation of INtopFORM, resulting in stories about INtopFORM on two local television newscasts and several radio news-casts. INtopFORM also made the front page of the Johnson City Press on November 3rd, the day of an exciting student kickoff event. At ETSU’s homecoming basketball game the first 100 students at both the men and women’s games received INtopFORM tumblers. All students who attended received INtopFORM pom-poms and were invited to participate in a text-to-win competition promoting INtopFORM. In addition, basketball game program inserts featured INtopFORM, reaching all of the alumni, faculty, staff, and community members who attended the games.

An INtopFORM media competition, scheduled for early 2013, will culminate the initial phase of the communication campaign. Emphasizing collaboration among students and faculty, the competition invites teams that include at least one faculty member and one student to submit entries. These entries should use video, audio, text, graphic elements, creative performance, or combinations of media to exemplify excellence in at least two INtopFORM learning outcomes.

When ETSU begins implementing the QEP in summer 2013, the INtopFORM leadership team will assume responsibility for the communication campaign. The ongoing campaign will not only promote participation in specific INtopFORM initiatives; it will encourage all ETSU students and employees to pursue excellence in seeking, using and communicating information.

INtopFORM Website. ETSU created an INtopFORM website (http://www.etsu.edu/intopform) in summer 2012. When the university begins implementing the plan in summer 2013, the director of INtopFORM and the INtopFORM librarian will develop the following components of the site:

• INtopFORM Resource Center. The online resource center will be a repository of ideas and materials for teaching and assessing information fluency. It will also announce on-ground and online professional development opportunities related to INtopFORM.

• INtopFORM Showcase. The showcase will spotlight achievements in seeking, using and communicating

44 | ETSU QEP

information by all members of the university community, including students, faculty, staff, and

alumni. It will celebrate excellence and provide examples that students and others at ETSU can

emulate. The showcase will include—with permission—examples of superior student work;

projects by ETSU academic and administrative units that demonstrate excellence in seeking, using or

communicating information; and professional or civic work by ETSU alumni that exemplifies INtopFORM virtues.

5.5 Faculty Development in INtopFORM

Asking insightful questions; seeking, evaluating, using, and communicating information; and recognizing one’s ethical obligations when so doing so: the six abilities that define students who are “INtopFORM” are central to every program of study at ETSU. The faculty development plan for INtop-FORM will help faculty examine these abilities within their disciplines, and it will equip them with instructional resources and strategies. These resources and strategies will empha-size the learning strategies identified by ETSU’s 2010-11 QEP Theme Committee—collaborative learning, mentoring and experiential education. The faculty development plan will also encourage lively conversations about teaching among participating faculty. Such conversations occurred frequently among members of the QEP Development Team and were among the most satisfying parts of the development process. The faculty development plan will create similar opportunities for many ETSU faculty members.

The INtopFORM faculty development plan includes the following elements, each of which is supported by the budget and staffing plan for the QEP (see Institutional Capability):

• the INtopFORM online resource center (previously described);• an annual, three-day summer conference (Appendix A);• year-long faculty learning communities; and• consultations with participating faculty members by

the director of INtopFORM, the director of Assess-ment and Teaching, and the INtopFORM librarian.

| 45

The annual summer conference and the faculty learning communities will bring together faculty from diverse disciplines to learn with and from each other. The interdisciplinary collaboration fostered by INtopFORM will advance ETSU’s commitment to increasing integrated, interdisciplinary programs of study and research and cre-ative activity. The university’s mission statement espouses “innovation and integration of educational programs” and “interdisciplinary collaboration,” and INtopFORM will strongly support these aims.

Annual Summer Conference. Each summer beginning 2013 faculty representatives of programs of study joining INtopFORM and newly awarded INtopFORM faculty fellows will attend a three-day conference at ETSU. As described in Appendix A, the conference leaders will include the director of INtopFORM, the director of Assessment and Teaching, and the INtopFORM librarian. Appendix A outlines the pur-poses of the conference in detail. The expected outcomes of the conference include the following:

1. Participants will gain a deeper understanding of the six INtopFORM competencies.

2. Participants will discuss the relevance of the INtopFORM competencies for their disciplines.3. Participants will begin to explore teaching practices

that support the INtopFORM competencies.4. Participants will know the tasks to be completed

during the first year of participation in INtopFORM.5. Participants will tentatively identify (a) courses in

their program of study in which students will learn INtopFORM competencies and (b) points in the program at which faculty will assess upper-division students’ attainment of the competencies.

6. Participants will get to know other faculty in their INtopFORM cohort, as well as the director of

INtopFORM, the director of Assessment and Teaching, and the INtopFORM librarian.7. Participants will become acquainted with the facul-

ty learning community concept.8. Participants will enthusiastically look forward to helping their students be “INtopFORM.”

46 | ETSU QEP

Faculty Learning Communities. During the first year in which a program of study joins in INtopFORM (e.g., 2013-14 for the inaugural class), three or more faculty from the program will participate in a faculty learning community facilitated by the director of INtopFORM. The faculty learning community engages participants in peer mentoring and collaboration as they explore teaching practices (Cox, 2004; Furco & Moely, 2012; Glowacki & Brown, 2007; Goto, Marshall & Gaule, n.d.; Huwe, 2006; Layne, Froyd, Morgan & Kenimer, 2002; Ward & Selvester, 2012). Because approximately 12 programs of study (for a total of about 36 faculty members) will join INtop-FORM each year, we will create three to four new learning communities annually, with eight to 12 members each. The groups will meet every other week to discuss teaching practices related to INtopFORM and to assist each other in developing and trying out new ideas.

Consultation. The director of INtopFORM, the director of Assessment and Teaching and the INtopFORM librarian will work closely with each program of study participating, as well as with the INtopFORM faculty fellows and units implementing student support and engagement projects related to the QEP.

| 47

48 | ETSU QEP

INto

pFO

RM

Im

plem

enta

tion

Cal

enda

rYe

ar 0

: 201

2-13

Year

1: 2

013-

14Ye

ar 2

: 201

4-15

Year

3: 2

015-

16Ye

ar 4

: 201

6-17

Year

5: 2

017-

18Su

FaSp

SuFa

SpSu

FaSp

SuFa

SpSu

FaSp

SuFa

SpFi

rst Y

ear C

ours

esFa

culty

atte

nd IT

F w

orks

hop

X

Rede

sign

CSC

I 110

0 C

ours

eX

X

Impl

emen

t CSC

I 110

0 re

desi

gnX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Prog

ram

s of

Stu

dyIs

sue

invi

tatio

n to

pa

rtici

pate

XX

XX

X

Iden

tify

parti

cipa

ting

prog

ram

sX

XX

XX

Con

duct

ITF

sum

mer

co

nfer

ence

XX

XX

X

Con

duct

facu

lty le

arni

ng

com

mun

ities

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Impl

emen

t ITF

pla

ns in

pr

ogra

ms

of s

tudy

Firs

t coh

ort

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Seco

nd c

ohor

tX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Third

coh

ort

XX

XX

XX

Four

th c

ohor

tX

XX

ITF

Facu

lty F

ello

wsh

ips

Issu

e re

ques

t for

pr

opos

als

XX

XX

X

Sele

ct p

artic

ipat

ing

facu

ltyX

XX

XX

Con

duct

ITF

sum

mer

co

nfer

ence

XX

XX

X

Con

duct

fello

wsh

ip

proj

ects

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Repo

rt IT

F fe

llow

ship

pr

ojec

t res

ults

XX

XX

Stud

ent S

uppo

rt a

nd

Enga

gem

ent P

roje

cts

Issu

e re

ques

t for

pr

opos

als

XX

XX

X

| 49

Year

0: 2

012-

13Ye

ar 1

: 201

3-14

Year

2: 2

014-

15Ye

ar 3

: 201

5-16

Year

4: 2

016-

17Ye

ar 5

: 201

7-18

SuFa

SpSu

FaSp

SuFa

SpSu

FaSp

SuFa

SpSu

FaSp

Sele

ct p

artic

ipat

ing

proj

ects

XX

XX

X

Con

duct

ITF

sum

mer

co

nfer

ence

XX

XX

X

Con

duct

ITF

stud

ent s

ucce

ss

and

enga

gem

ent p

roje

cts

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Repo

rt pr

ojec

t res

ults

XX

XX

Supp

ortin

g IN

topF

OR

MFo

rm IN

topF

ORM

co

mm

unic

atio

n te

amX

Hire

dire

ctor

of

asse

ssm

ent a

nd te

achi

ngX

Iden

tify

inte

rim d

irect

or

of th

e Q

EP

X

Begi

n in

terim

dire

ctor

of

the

QEP

X

Begi

n se

arch

for

INto

pFO

RM li

brar

ian

X

Begi

n Se

arch

for

QEP

Dire

ctor

X

Begi

n IN

topF

ORM

le

ader

ship

team

mee

tings

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Begi

n IN

topF

ORM

libr

aria

n an

d Q

EP D

irect

or

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Invi

te fa

culty

to s

ubm

it ex

ampl

es o

f exc

elle

nt

stud

ent w

ork

to IT

F Sh

owca

se

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Invi

te E

TSU

facu

lty, s

taff

and

alum

ni to

sub

mit

exam

ples

of

exce

llenc

e to

ITF

Show

case

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Post

exa

mpl

es o

f exc

elle

nce

to IN

topF

ORM

Sho

wca

seX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Des

ign

or a

cqui

re IN

top-

FORM

inst

ruct

iona

l mod

ules

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Subm

it an

nual

QEP

pro

gres

s re

port

to U

nive

rsity

Pla

nnin

g C

omm

ittee

XX

XX

X

50 | ETSU QEP

| 51

6 Assessing INtopFORM

6.1 Assessment Design

ETSU will assess two aspects of INtopFORM—implementation and results. The director of INtopFORM will assess implementation, and the Office of Assessment and Teaching in the Center for Academic Achievement will oversee and support assessment of student learning outcomes and other results of the plan.

Assessing implementation. We will assess implementation of INtopFORM using indicators such as the number of participating faculty and programs of study, attendance at workshops and meetings, the number and kind of communications about information fluency at ETSU, and the number and quality of submissions to the INtopFORM Showcase. We will also track compliance with the implementation calendar.

Assessing results. The foremost results of INtopFORM are the learning outcomes identified in the section on goals. ETSU will assess the attainment of these outcomes using several measures, described below. The university will collect baseline data on each measure prior to implementing an INtopFORM improvement action, then collect subsequent data following implementation. For instance, faculty in a

52 | ETSU QEP

participating program of study will collect baseline data in the year before the one in which they implement their INtopFORM redesign; they will collect assessment data after implementation begins and compare those data to the baselines. In most cases data will be collected annually.

6.2 QEP Assessment Plans Consulted

ETSU consulted a number of Quality Enhancement Plans at other colleges and universities to identify current practices in assessing information literacy, critical thinking and related competencies (e.g., writing). Table 19 presents the QEPs consulted and assessment methods they employ.

Table 19: Quality Enhancement Plans Consulted Regarding Assessment Practices

InstitutionUniversal

Assessment Rubric

iSkills* SAILS NSSEOther

Assessment Methods

Lincoln Memorial University X X X X XOld Dominion University X XSouthern Wesleyan Univeristy XTrinity University X XUniversity of Central Florida X XUniversity of Houston X XUniversity of North Georgia X X X

*Formerly the Information and Communication Technology Literacy Assessment

Study of these assessment practices provided valuable information about standardized tests including iSkills and SAILS, and it informed development of ETSU’s INtopFORM assessment rubric.

6.3 Assessment Measures

ETSU will use the following measures to assess student attainment of INtopFORM learning outcomes.

Standardized Final Exam in CSCI 1100, Using Information Technology. Students in all sections of CSCI 1100 currently take a standardized final exam that requires them to answer multiple choice questions and perform tasks using word processing, spreadsheets and presentation software. ETSU analyzes test data annually as part of its assessment of

| 53

general education competencies (C.S. 3.5.1). To attain an information technology learning outcome students must correctly answer at least 70 percent of the items measuring that outcome. When the Department of Computer and Information Sciences redesigns CSCI 1100 in the first year of the QEP, it will revise the final exam so it evaluates the INtopFORM learning outcomes. The department will collect baseline data in 2013-14, prior implementing the redesign in 2014-15, by giving the new exam (in an ungraded form) to a random sample of students enrolled in CSCI 1100.

Senior Information Fluency Exam. Because most students take CSCI 1100 as freshmen, the final exam provides data on learning in the first year of college. To assess enduring learning, ETSU also gives a similar test to a sample of 200 seniors every three years (see C.S. 3.5.1). When INtopFORM begins we will continue this practice using a test based on the revised CSCI 1100 exam. Whereas previously we gave the senior exam every three years, we will give the revised exam annually. By providing data on the basic information fluency skills of a broad cross-section of seniors, the test will help us assess the broad impact of INtopFORM on all ETSU under-graduates.

Assessments of Oral Communication and Writing in Selected General Education Courses. As noted in the section on assessment data supporting INtopFORM, the following assessments of oral communication and writing provided valuable evidence of ETSU students’ skills in evaluating, using and communicating information:

• annual evaluation of students’ final speeches in SPCH 1300 (General Speech), 2300 (Public

Speaking) and 2320 (Argumentation and Debate) using a standard scoring rubric; and

• annual evaluation of a sample of students’ research reports and persuasive proposals in ENGL 1020 (Critical Thinking and Argumentation) using a

standard scoring rubric.

ETSU will continue to use these assessments. Faculty in the Departments of Communication and Literature and Languages will adjust the rubrics to improve their usefulness in assessing INtopFORM learning outcomes. Data collected in spring 2014 during the annual assessment cycle will provide a baseline.

54 | ETSU QEP

California Critical Thinking Skills Test. ETSU uses the California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST) to assess senior students’ ability to understand and evaluate arguments and evidence. Because completing a senior exam is a legislatively mandated graduation requirement in the state of Tennessee, virtually all ETSU seniors take the CCTST. The CCTST is a national, standardized test appropriate for institutions of higher education, and ETSU compares the performance of its students to that of students in a national reference group, created by the test vendor. Table 20 shows how CCTST scores map to INtopFORM learning outcomes.

Table20: INtopFORM Learning Outcomes and Related CCTST ScalesINtopFORM

Outcome CCTST Scale Vendor’s Description of Scale

EVALUATING Evaluation and Explanation

Evaluation and explanation skills are used to assess the credibility of claims, opinions, proposals, information sources, and the strength of arguments. Evaluation skills assess the products of analyses, interpretations, options, beliefs, ideas, recommendations, inferences and justifications. Explanation provides the evidence, reasons, methods, criteria, assumptions or rationale for the claims we make and the conclusions we draw. A complete and accurate evaluation requires a well-grounded explanation.

EVALUATING Analysis and Interpretation

Analytical and interpretive skills are used to gather accurate detailed information from charts, diagrams and documents. People use these skills to define problems and to identify options, assumptions, and limitations on decision making. Analysis and interpretation are used to closely examine ideas and to determine the significance of what a person is saying or what something means in a given context. Interpretation is a necessary skill for an accurate analysis.

USING Inference Inference skills are used when offering conjectures, suggesting hypotheses and drawing conclusions from reasons and evidence. Inference skills indicate the necessary consequences or the very probable consequences of a given set of facts and conditions. Inference is the process of reasoning from an initial set of reasons to the conclusions which flow from those reasons. Inferences built on false beliefs, misunderstandings, bad data, or biased evaluations can turn out to be mistaken, even if those conclusions were reached using excellent inference skills.

CCTST results will help us evaluate the institution-wide effects of the QEP. Furthermore, because the university also disag-gregates CCTST data by academic department and major, we should be able to detect changes in INtopFORM learning outcomes in undergraduate programs of study participating in the QEP.

iSkills Test. The Educational Testing Service (ETS) developed the iSkills test to measure information literacy, as defined by the Association of College and Research Libraries, and technology literacy. The iSkills is a 75-minute, activity-based test administered online that measures students’ ability to navigate, critically evaluate and make sense of information accessed through digital technology. ETSU will administer the test to a random sample of 200 seniors each year. Collection of baseline data will occur in 2013-14. Items on the iSkills assessment map to five of the INtopFORM learning outcomes, as shown in Table 21.

| 55

Table 21: INtopFORM Learning Outcomes and Related iSkills TasksINtopFORM

Outcome iSkills Task Vendor’s Definition

QUESTIONING Define Understand and articulate the scope of an information problem in order to facilitate the electronic search for information by:

• Distinguishing a clear, concise and topical research question from poorly framed questions, such as ones that are overly broad or do not otherwise fulfill the information

need • Asking questions of a “professor” that help disambiguate a vague research assignment • Conducting effective preliminary information searches to help frame a research statement

SEEKING Access Collect and/or retrieve information in digital environments. Information sources might be web pages, databases, discussion groups, email or online descriptions of print media. Tasks include:

• Generating and combining search terms (keywords) to satisfy the requirements of a par-ticular research task

• Efficiently browsing one or more resources to locate pertinent information • Deciding what types of resources might yield the most useful information for a particular

needEVALUATING Evaluate Judge whether information satisfies an information problem by determining authority, bias, timeli-

ness, relevance and other aspects of materials. Tasks include: • Judging the relative usefulness of provided web pages and online journal articles • Evaluating whether a database contains appropriately current and pertinent information • Deciding the extent to which a collection of resources sufficiently covers a research area

USING Manage Organize information to help you or others find it later by: • Categorizing emails into appropriate folders based on a critical view of the emails’ con-

tents • Arranging personnel information into an organizational chart • Sorting files, emails or database returns to clarify clusters of related information

USING Integrate Interpret and represent information using digital tools to synthesize, summarize, compare and con-trast information from multiple sources. Tasks include:

• Comparing advertisements, emails or websites from competing vendors by summarizing information into a table

• Incorporating information from different sources to conduct a scientific experiment and report the results

• Placing results from an academic or sports tournament into a spreadsheet to clarify stand-ings and decide the need for playoffs

USING Create Adapt, apply, design or construct information in digital environments by: • Editing and formatting a document according to a set of editorial specifications • Creating a presentation slide to support a position on a controversial topic • Creating a data display to clarify the relationship between academic and

economic variablesCOMMUNICATING Communicate Disseminate information tailored to a particular audience in an effective digital format by:

• Formatting a document to make it more useful to a particular group • Transforming an email into a succinct presentation to meet an audience’s needs • Selecting and organizing slides for distinct presentations to different audiences • Designing a flyer to advertise to a distinct group of users

National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE). ETSU administers the NSSE every three years. The next survey is scheduled for spring 2014, and we will use the results to supplement other assessments of INtopFORM. Because the Center for Postsecondary Research is currently revising the NSSE, the exact survey items to be used remain to be determined. Table 22 shows how items on the 2011 NSSE (ETSU’s most recent) map to INtopFORM outcomes.

56 | ETSU QEP

Table 22: INtopFORM Outcomes and Related Items on 2011 National Survey of Student EngagementINtopFORM

OutcomeRelated NSSE Item

Percentage of students who report that . . .QUESTIONING, SEEKING, USING

their experience at ETSU has contributed to their knowledge, skills and personal development in solving complex real world problems quite a bit or very much.

SEEKING, USING their experience at ETSU has contributed to their knowledge, skills and personal development in using computing and information technology quite a bit or very much.

USING they worked on a paper or project that required integrating ideas or information from various sources often or very often.

USING their coursework emphasizes synthesizing and organizing ideas, information, or experiences quite a bit or very much.

EVALUATING their coursework emphasizes making judgments about the value of information, arguments, or methods quite a bit or very much.

EVALUATING they examined the strengths and weaknesses of their own views on a topic or issue often or very oftenEVALUATING their experience at ETSU has contributed to their knowledge, skills and personal development in thinking

critically and analytically quite a bit or very much.

Assessment of INtopFORM Outcomes in Undergraduate Programs of Study. Faculty in every program of study participating in the QEP will develop a means of assessing majors’ attainment of the six INtopFORM learning outcomes. The director of Assessment and Teaching will assist faculty in designing the assessment and will ultimately approve the assessment protocol. Programs will collect baseline data in the first year of their involvement in INtopFORM and will report data annually thereafter. Regardless of the method used, all programs will report data in a common format.

Programs may select one of two methods for assessing INtopFORM learning outcomes:

(A) using an approved rubric to evaluate papers or projects completed in designated upper-division

courses;(B) studying students’ performance on designated items

on major field tests, standardized final exams in upper-division courses, or specially designed tests of

information fluency.

| 57

58 | ETSU QEP

Menu for Designing INtopFORM Assessment RubricsQUESTIONING: Students ask questions that facilitate the solution of problems and the pursuit of opportunities.

Questions define the scope of the area of interest.Questions identify key issues to be resolved.Questions demonstrate understanding of the problem, task or topic.Questions encourage a broad search for information.Questions are relevant to the problem, task or topic.Questions bring needed focus or structure to the problem, task or topic.Questions examine diverse perspectives on the problem, task or topic. Questions reflect attitudes of openness and curiosity.Overall Rating (required item)Other items (subject to approval):

SEEKING: Students locate or create information needed to accomplish their purposes. Sources used are credible.Sources used are appropriate for the purpose.The student uses several sources.The student uses different kinds of sources.Sources and information used indicate a thorough search process.Sources and information used indicate persistence and resourcefulness in seeking information.The student insightfully evaluates the search process.The student conducted an iterative search process.The student conducted an efficient search process.The student correctly identifies limitations of research he or she conducted.Overall Rating (required item)Other items (subject to approval):

EVALUATING: Students apply critical thinking skills in evaluating sources, information and search processes.The student correctly analyzes the reliability of sources or information.The student correctly analyzes the potential bias of sources.The student insightfully discusses the implications of information.

Option (A): Evaluating Papers or Projects Using Approved Rubrics

To help faculty build INtopFORM assessment rubrics, the QEP Development Team created a “menu” from which faculty may select rubric items appropriate for their disciplines and the student work to be evaluated. All programs of study must provide an overall rating for each learning outcome. In fall 2012 faculty, including members of the development team, piloted rubrics created using the menu. Programs may also create alternative rubric items with the approval of the director of Assessment and Teaching. The menu of rubric items appears below.

| 59

The student demonstrates comprehension of information.The student correctly identifies assumptions underlying information.The student identifies questions raised by information.The student analyzes his or her own and others’ assumptions.Overall Rating (required item)Other items (subject to approval):

USING: Students assemble and synthesize information to accomplish their purposes.Information used is relevant to the purpose.The amount of information provided is sufficient for the purpose.The student draws sound conclusions from information.The student skillfully synthesizes information from multiple sources.The student draws non-obvious insights from information.The analysis of information flows logically from point to point.The student does not oversimplify complex information.The student clearly relates information to the larger purpose.The student draws upon diverse perspectives.Overall Rating (required item)Other items (subject to approval):

COMMUNICATING: Students communicate information effectively.The student aids others’ understanding of information.The student provides useful explanations of information.The student presents information accurately.The student presents information completely.The presentation of information helps others see connections or larger themes.The presentation of information arouses others’ interest.The presentation of information evokes questions or further study by others.

60 | ETSU QEP

The following example illustrates an INtopFORM rubric created using the assessment menu.

Sample INtopFORM Assessment Rubric3=Superior, 2=Satisfactory, 1=Unsatisfactory

QUESTIONING: Students ask questions that facilitate the solution of problems and the pursuit of opportunities. 3 2 1

Questions identify key issues to be resolved. q q q

Questions bring needed focus or structure to the problem, task or topic. q q q

Questions examine diverse perspectives on the problem, task or topic. q q q

Overall Rating q q q

SEEKING: Students locate or create information needed to accomplish their purposes. 3 2 1Sources used are appropriate for the topic or task. q q q

Sources and information useed indicate a thorough search process. q q q

Sources and information used indicate persistence and resourcefulness in seeking information. q q q

Overall Rating q q q

EVALUATING: Students apply critical thinking skills in evaluating sources, information, and search processes. 3 2 1

The student correctly analyzes the potential bias of sources. q q q

The student correctly identifies assumptions underlying information. q q q

The student insightfully discusses the implications of information. q q q

Overall Rating q q q

USING: Students assemble and synthesize information to accomplish their purposes. 3 2 1Information used is relevant to the problem or topic. q q q

The student draws sound conclusions from information. q q q

The student skillfully synthesizes information from multiple sources. q q q

Overall Rating q q q

COMMUNICATING: Students communicate information effectively. 3 2 1The presentation of information helps others see connections or larger themes. q q q

The presentation of information arouses others’ interest. q q q

The presentation of information evokes questions or further study by others. q q q

Overall Rating q q q

RECOGNIZING: Students recognize the responsibilities and consequences related to information ethics and intellectual property. 3 2 1

The student clearly identifies the sources of information used. q q q

Overall Rating q q q

| 61

Option (B): End-of-Program Tests

In some disciplines evaluating senior students’ performance on designated items on tests such as major field exams, standardized final exams in upper-division courses, or locally developed tests of information fluency administered to seniors may prove to be a more appropriate means for assessing INtopFORM outcomes. Participating programs may select this option subject to approval by the director of Assessment and Teaching.

62 | ETSU QEP

6.4 Overview of INtopFORM Assessment Plan

Table 23 provides an overview of the INtopFORM assessment plan.

Table 23: Matrix of INtopFORM Learning Outcomes and MeasuresCSCI

1100 Final Exam

Senior IF Exam CCTST iSkills

SPCH & ENGL

Rubrics

Program-Level

AssessmentNSSE

QUESTIONING: Students ask questions that facilitate the solution of problems and the pursuit of opportunities.

X X X X X

SEEKING: Students locate or create information needs to accomplish their purposes.

X X X X X

EVALUATING: Students apply critical thinking skills in evaluating sources, information and search processes.

X X X X X X

USING: Students assemble and synthesize information to accomplish their purposes.

X X X X X X X

COMMUNICATING: Students communicate information effectively. X X X X X

RECOGNIZING: Students recognize the responsibilities and consequences related to information ethics and intellectual property.

X X X

| 63

64 | ETSU QEP

Tab

le 2

4: I

Nto

pFO

RM

Ass

essm

ent

Cal

enda

rYe

ar 0

: 201

2-13

Year

1: 2

013-

14Ye

ar 2

: 201

4-15

Year

3: 2

015-

16Ye

ar 4

: 201

6-17

Year

5: 2

017-

18Su

FaSp

SuFa

SpSu

FaSp

SuFa

SpSu

FaSp

SuFa

SpC

SCI 1

100

Fina

l Exa

mRe

desi

gn fi

nal e

xam

in C

SCI 1

100

XC

olle

ct b

asel

ine

data

on

CSC

I 110

0 fin

alX

Col

lect

and

Ana

lyze

fina

l exa

m d

ata

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Seni

or In

form

atio

n Fl

uenc

y Ex

amC

olle

ct S

enio

r IF

Exam

Ba

selin

e D

ata

XX

Col

lect

and

ana

lyze

IF E

xam

Dat

aX

XX

XX

XX

XC

CTS

TC

olle

ct b

asel

ine

data

XX

XC

olle

ct a

nd a

naly

ze C

CTS

T D

ata

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

iSki

llsPi

lot t

he iS

kills

Exa

mX

Col

lect

bas

elin

e da

taX

XC

olle

ct a

nd a

naly

ze iS

kills

dat

aX

XX

XX

XX

XSP

CH

& E

NG

L ru

bric

sFa

culty

adj

ust r

ubric

item

s to

alig

n w

ith IN

topF

ORM

lear

ning

out

com

esX

X

Col

lect

bas

elin

e da

taX

Col

lect

and

ana

lyze

rubr

ic re

sults

XX

XX

Prog

ram

Lev

el A

sses

smen

tPi

lot I

Nto

pFO

RM ru

bric

XX

Tabl

e 24

pro

vide

s a ti

mel

ine

for t

he IN

topF

ORM

ass

essm

ent p

lan.

| 65

Coh

ort 1

Dev

elop

pro

gram

ass

essm

ent p

lan

XX

Col

lect

Bas

elin

e D

ata

XC

olle

ct a

nd a

naly

ze R

esul

tsX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XC

ohor

t 2D

evel

op p

rogr

am a

sses

smen

t pla

nX

XC

olle

ct B

asel

ine

Dat

aX

Col

lect

and

ana

lyze

Res

ults

XX

XX

XX

XX

XC

ohor

t 3D

evel

op p

rogr

am a

sses

smen

t pla

nX

XC

olle

ct B

asel

ine

Dat

aX

Col

lect

and

ana

lyze

Res

ults

XX

XX

XX

Coh

ort 4

Dev

elop

pro

gram

ass

essm

ent p

lan

XX

Col

lect

Bas

elin

e D

ata

XC

olle

ct a

nd a

naly

ze R

esul

tsX

XX

Coh

ort 5

Dev

elop

pro

gram

ass

essm

ent p

lan

XX

Col

lect

Bas

elin

e D

ata

XN

SSE

Con

duct

NSS

EX

XAn

alyz

e re

sults

XX

XX

66 | ETSU QEP

| 67

7 Institutional Capability to Support INtopFORM

ETSU will fully support implementation of INtopFORM through dedicated staffing, clear reporting lines and an adequate budget.

7.1 Organizational Structure Supporting INtopFORM

Figure 1 depicts the organizational structure and reporting lines for INtopFORM.

68 | ETSU QEP

President

University Planning Committee

Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education/Executive Director of

Planning & AnalysisDean of Libraries

Director of Quality Enhancement

Plan

Director of Assessment &

Teaching

INtopFORM Librarian

Vice Provoste-Learning

or Designee

Director, CSCI 1100, Using Information Technology

Dean Representative

Vice Provost Student Affairsor Designee

Undergraduate Student

Representative

Graduate or Professional

Student Representative

Faculty Representative

Faculty Representative At-Large Member

INto

pF

OR

M

L

ea

de

rsh

ip

T

ea

m

aa

a a a

Figure 1. INtopFORM Organizational Chart

7.2 Key Personnel

Implementing INtopFORM will require broad participation by the entire ETSU community. To provide adequate administrative support for the plan, the university will dedicate four staff positions to INtopFORM, three of which will be created and one of which was filled late in spring 2012.

Director of the Quality Enhancement Plan. ETSU will create a new position of director of Quality Enhancement Plan. The director will oversee implementation of the plan, chair the INtopFORM Leadership Team, and work collaboratively with the director of Assessment and Teaching and the INtopFORM Librarian to advance the plan. The university will advertise the position in January 2013; the start date will be July 1, 2014, following anticipated approval of INtopFORM by SACS-COC.

| 69

Director of Assessment and Teaching. In spring 2012 ETSU filled a new full-time position of director of Assessment and Teaching. Approximately 25 percent of the director’s assignment will be to oversee and support assessment of INtopFORM learning outcomes and other results.

INtopFORM Librarian. ETSU will create a new position of INtopFORM Librarian, which will be dedicated 100 percent to support of INtopFORM. The librarian will develop or acquire instructional resources, including online modules related to information fluency skills; create and maintain the INtopFORM online resource center; and coordinate course-embedded instruction in information fluency provided by other library faculty and staff. The university will advertise the position in January 2013; the start date will be July 1, 2014, following anticipated approval of INtopFORM by SACS-COC.

Executive Aide to the Director of the Quality Enhancement Plan. ETSU will create a full-time executive aide position to support the director of the Quality Enhancement Plan and the daily operation of INtopFORM. The university will advertise the position in April 2013; the start date will be approximately July 1, 2014. (The Director of Assessment and Teaching is currently supported by an executive aide, and the INtopFORM librarian will receive staff support through the University Libraries.)

7.3 INtopFORMLeadershipTeam

As depicted in Figure 1 above, general oversight of the QEP will reside with the INtopFORM leadership team. The team’s membership reflects the vital role faculty, students, staff, and administrators will play in making INtopFORM a success. The team will report annually to the University Planning Commit-tee, which oversees strategic initiatives at ETSU.

7.4 Budget

The budget supporting INtopFORM, presented in table 25, reflects ETSU’s strong commitment to the success of this initiative.

“Knowledge is power. Information is power. The secreting or hoarding of knowledge or information may be an act of tyranny camouflaged as humility.”

-Robin Morgan

70 | ETSU QEPT

able

25:

INto

pFO

RM

Bud

get,

FY

201

4 th

roug

h 20

18C

urre

ntly

Bud

gete

d C

ost

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

Tota

lPe

rson

nel

Dire

ctor

of Q

ualit

y En

hanc

emen

t Pla

n*70

,000

71,4

0072

,828

74,2

8575

,770

364,

283

Bene

fits*

26,5

0026

,780

27,0

6627

,357

27,6

5413

5,35

7Ex

ecut

ive

Aide

, QEP

*22

,980

23,4

4023

,908

24,3

8724

,874

119,

589

Bene

fits

17,0

9617

,188

17,2

8217

,377

17,4

7586

,418

GA

supp

ortin

g D

irect

or, I

Nto

pFO

RM (1

2-m

o.)

8,00

08,

000

8,00

08,

000

8,00

040

,000

GA

tuiti

on s

uppo

rt10

,500

10,5

0010

,500

10,5

0010

,500

52,5

00D

irect

or, A

sses

smen

t & T

each

ing

(25%

)*15

,375

15,6

8315

,996

16,3

1616

,642

80,0

12Ex

ecut

ive

Aide

, Ass

essm

ent &

Tea

chin

g (2

5%)*

5,74

55,

860

5,97

76,

097

6,21

929

,897

GA

supp

ortin

g D

irect

or, A

sses

smen

t and

Tea

chin

g (1

2-m

o.)

8,00

08,

000

8,00

08,

000

8,00

040

,000

GA

tuiti

on s

uppo

rt10

,500

10,5

0010

,500

10,5

0010

,500

52,5

00IN

topF

ORM

Lib

raria

n*55

,000

56,1

0057

,222

58,3

6659

,534

286,

222

Bene

fits

23,5

0023

,720

23,9

4424

,173

24,4

0711

9,74

4Eq

uipm

ent

Dire

ctor

QEP

sta

rt up

; com

pute

r rep

lace

men

t in

FY 2

017

5,00

02,

000

7,00

0Ex

ecut

ive

Aide

, QEP

sta

rt up

; com

pute

r rep

lace

men

t in

FY 2

017

5,00

02,

000

7,00

0IN

topF

ORM

Lib

raria

n st

art u

p; c

ompu

ter r

epla

cem

ent i

n FY

201

75,

000

2,00

07,

000

Ope

ratin

gQ

ualit

y En

hanc

emen

t Pla

n of

fice

5,00

05,

000

5,00

05,

000

5,00

025

,000

ITF

Initi

ativ

esIT

F Pr

ogra

m o

f Stu

dy A

war

ds (m

ax. $

6000

eac

h; a

vera

ge o

f 12

annu

ally

)*13

2,00

084

,000

72,0

0072

,000

72,0

0043

2,00

0IT

F Fe

llow

s Aw

ards

($20

00 e

ach;

12

annu

ally

)24

,000

24,0

0024

,000

24,0

0024

,000

120,

000

Stud

ent S

uppo

rt &

Enga

gem

ent A

war

ds ($

3000

eac

h; 3

ann

ually

)9,

000

9,00

09,

000

9,00

09,

000

45,0

00M

arke

ting

& P

rom

otio

nIT

F Sh

owca

se e

vent

(Oct

ober

1st

)2,

000

2,00

02,

000

2,00

02,

000

10,0

00IT

F re

cogn

ition

2,00

02,

000

2,00

02,

000

2,00

010

,000

Bann

ers,

flie

rs, o

ther

com

mun

icat

ions

2,50

02,

500

2,50

02,

500

2,50

012

,500

Ass

essm

ent

iSki

lls**

6,00

06,

300

6,61

56,

946

7,29

333

,154

CC

TST:

Cur

rent

ly b

udge

ted

20,1

0020

,100

20,1

0020

,100

20,1

0010

0,50

0C

CTS

T: N

ew c

osts

ove

r FY

2012

-13*

**2,

060

4,33

26,

836

9,59

712

,641

35,4

65Fa

culty

Dev

elop

men

tIT

F su

mm

er w

orks

hop

(spe

aker

s, ro

om, f

ood,

mat

eria

ls)

10,0

0010

,000

10,0

0010

,000

10,0

0050

,000

Oth

er fa

culty

dev

elop

men

t10

,000

10,0

0010

,000

10,0

0010

,000

50,0

00IT

F bi

wee

kly

mee

tings

(fac

ulty

lear

ning

com

mun

ities

)1,

000

1,00

01,

000

1,00

01,

000

5,00

0Tr

avel Dire

ctor

of Q

EP, I

Nto

pFO

RM L

ibra

rian,

et a

l.5,

000

5,00

05,

000

5,00

05,

000

25,0

00FY

Tot

als

All i

tem

s51

8,85

646

2,40

245

7,27

447

0,50

147

2,10

92,

381,

141

Cur

rent

ly b

udge

ted

41,2

2041

,642

42,0

7342

,513

42,9

6121

0,40

9N

et n

ew c

osts

477,

636

420,

760

415,

201

427,

988

429,

148

2,17

0,73

2*A

ssum

es 2

% a

nnua

l inc

reas

e

**As

sum

es 5

% a

nnua

l inc

reas

e

***A

ssum

es 5

% a

nnua

l inc

reas

es in

cos

t per

test

and

num

ber o

f tes

ts g

iven

| 71

8 Summary

INtopFORM, East Tennessee State University’s Quality Enhancement Plan, aims to equip and motivate ETSU students to excel in seeking, using and communicating information. The plan advances the university’s mission—preparing students “to become productive, enlightened citizens who actively serve their communities and our world.” Because the success of every unit at ETSU also hinges on the effective use of information, the QEP can transform the entire institution. Being “INtopFORM” is something to which every member of the university community can aspire.

The QEP emerged from a deliberate, inclusive selection process that sought input from all university stakeholders and drew upon numerous assessment data. These included first-year and senior-year assessments of students’ information technology skills, first-year and senior-year assessments of students’ oral communication and writing, the California Critical Thinking Skills Test, and the National Survey of Student Engagement.

While focusing on undergraduate education, the plan provides opportunities for participation by faculty teaching graduate and professional students, as well by university units promoting student success and engagement. INtopFORM

72 | ETSU QEP

adopts a fourfold strategy to achieve its aims: introducing information fluency skills in the first year of college, enhancing mastery of INtopFORM learning outcomes in undergraduate programs of study, sponsoring projects by individual faculty across the university, and fostering an institutional culture of excellence. Faculty development is fundamental for the success of INtopFORM. Faculty development will begin in INtopFORM summer conferences and continue throughout the academic year in faculty learning communities.

ETSU will use a comprehensive assessment plan to evaluate the effectiveness of INtopFORM. Each of the six learning outcomes that define excellence in information fluency will be evaluated by at least three different measures.

The university will support implementation of INtopFORM by hiring a director of the Quality Enhancement Plan and executive aide and an INtopFORM Librarian. ETSU’s Office of Assessment and Teaching will support and oversee assessment of the QEP. Reflecting a strong institutional commitment to the plan, a budget of over $2 million will fund INtopFORM.

Although INtopFORM will officially conclude upon the submission of the QEP Impact Report, we fully expect the plan to have lasting effects on the university. Depending upon their effectiveness, the strategies and activities related to INtopFORM are likely to persist long after the conclusion of the Quality Enhancement Plan.

| 73

74 | ETSU QEP

References

American Library Association (July 24, 1989). Presidential committee on information literacy: Final report.

Retrieved from: http://www.ala.org/acrl/publications/whitepapers/presi-

dential

American Management Association. (2010). AMA 2010 critical skills survey. Retrieved from: http://www.p21.org/documents/Critical%20Skills%20Sur-

vey%20Executive%20Summary.pdf

Association of College & Research Libraries. (2000). Information literacy standards for higher education. Retrieved from: http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/acrl/standards/infor-

mationliteracycompetency.cfm

Albitz, Rebecca S. (2007). The what and who of information literacy and critical thinking in higher education.

Libraries and the Academy, 7: 97-109

Arum, R. and Roska, J. (2011). Academically adrift: Limited learning on college campuses. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Arum, R., Cho, E., Kim, J. and Roska, J. (2012). Documenting uncertain times: Post-graduate transitions

of the academically adrift cohort. New York: Social Science Research Council.

Asher, A.D., and Duke, L.M. (2011). College Libraries and Student Culture: What We Now Know. Chicago: ALA

Editions.

Baruchson-Arbib, S. and Yaari, E. (2004). Printed versus Internet plagiarism: A study of students’ perception.

International Journal of Information Ethics, 1, 1–7

Bruce, Christine S. (1999). Workplace experiences of information literacy. International Journal of Information Management 19, 33-47.

Cappel, J. J. (2002). Entry-level IS job skills: A survey of employers. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 42, 76-82.

| 75

American Library Association (July 24, 1989). Presidential committee on information literacy: Final report.

Retrieved from: http://www.ala.org/acrl/publications/whitepapers/presi-

dential

American Management Association. (2010). AMA 2010 critical skills survey. Retrieved from: http://www.p21.org/documents/Critical%20Skills%20Sur-

vey%20Executive%20Summary.pdf

Association of College & Research Libraries. (2000). Information literacy standards for higher education. Retrieved from: http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/acrl/standards/infor-

mationliteracycompetency.cfm

Albitz, Rebecca S. (2007). The what and who of information literacy and critical thinking in higher education.

Libraries and the Academy, 7: 97-109

Arum, R. and Roska, J. (2011). Academically adrift: Limited learning on college campuses. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Arum, R., Cho, E., Kim, J. and Roska, J. (2012). Documenting uncertain times: Post-graduate transitions

of the academically adrift cohort. New York: Social Science Research Council.

Asher, A.D., and Duke, L.M. (2011). College Libraries and Student Culture: What We Now Know. Chicago: ALA

Editions.

Baruchson-Arbib, S. and Yaari, E. (2004). Printed versus Internet plagiarism: A study of students’ perception.

International Journal of Information Ethics, 1, 1–7

Bruce, Christine S. (1999). Workplace experiences of information literacy. International Journal of Information Management 19, 33-47.

Cappel, J. J. (2002). Entry-level IS job skills: A survey of employers. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 42, 76-82.

76 | ETSU QEP

Connaway, L.S., Dickey, T.J. & Radford, M.L. (2011). “If it is too inconvenient I’m not going after it:” Convenience as a critical factor in information-seeking behaviors.

Library and Information Science Research, 33, 179-190. doi:10.1016/j.lisr.2010.12.002

Cox, M. D. (2004). Building Faculty Learning Communities. In New Directions for Teaching and Learning, Spring 2004 (pp. 1-163). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Cronan, T.P. Foltz, C.B., and Jones T.W. (2006) Piracy, computer crime, and IS misuse at the university. Communications of the ACM, 49, 85-90.

Dashora, K. (2011). Cyber crime in the society: problems and preventions. Journal of Alternative Perspectives in the Social Sciences, 3, 240-259.

Elliot, A. J., McGregor, H. A. & Gable, S. ( 1999). Achievement goals, study strategies, and exam performance: A mediational analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 549– 563. doi:

10.1037/0022-0663.91.3.549

Furco, A., & Moely, B. E. (2012). Using learning communities to build faculty support for pedagogical innovation: A multicampus study. The Journal of Higher Education, 83, No. 1 (Jan/Feb), 128-154.

Glowacki-Dudka, M., & Brown, M. P. (2007). Professional Development through faculty learning communities.

New Horizons in Adult Education & Human Resource Development, 21, Winter, 29-39.

Goad, T. W. (2002). Information literacy and workplace performance. Westport, CT: Quorum Books.

Goto, S. T., Marshall, P., & Gaule, S. (n.d.). Assessment of faculty learning communities. Retrieved Oct. 12, 2012, from Washington State Board for Technical and

Community College: http://www.sbctc.edu/college/education/assessment_of_

flc_marshall_oct09.pdf

| 77

Hart Research Associates. (2010). Raising the bar: Employers’ views on college learning in the wake of the

economic downturn. Retrieved from: http://www.aacu.org/leap/documents/2009_Employer-

Survey.pdf

Head, Alison J. & Eisenberg, Michael B. (2010). Truth be told: How college students evaluate and information in the digital age. Retrieved from:

http://projectinfolit.org/pdfs/PIL_Fall2010_Survey_FullRe-port1.pdf

Huwe, T. K. (2006, May). Breaking into communities of practice. Computers in Libraries, 26, Issue 5, pp. 22-25.

Layne, J., Froyd, J., Morgan, J., & Kenimer, A. (2002). Faculty learning communities. Frontiers in Education

Conference 32nd Annual Conference (F1A.13-F1A.18). Boston, MA: IEEE Conference Publications.

Ivanitskaya, L., OBoyle, I., and Casey, A.M. (2006). Health in-formation literacy and competencies of information age students: Results from the interactive online research readiness self-assessment (RRSA). Journal of Medical Internet Research, 82, e6. DOI: 10.2196/jmir.8.2.e6

Krapels, R.H. and Davis, B.D. (2003) Designation of ‘commu-nication skills’ in position listings. Business Communica-tion Quarterly, 66: 90-96.

Lloyd, Annemaree L. (2006). Information literacy landscapes: an emerging picture. Journal of Documentation, 62(5): 570-583.

Livingstone, S., VanCouvering, E., and Thumim, N. (2008) Converging traditions of research on media and

information literacies: Disciplinary, critical and methodological issues. In D.J. Leu, J. Coiro, M. Knobel

and C. Lankshear (Eds.) Handbook of Research on New Literacies (103-132). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/23564/1/Converging_traditions_of_research_on_media_and_information_literacies_(LSE-RO).pdf

78 | ETSU QEP

Miller, W. (1992). The future of bibliographic instruction and information literacy for the academic librarian. In B. Baker & M.E. Litzinger (Eds.), The evolving educational mission of the library. Chicago: American Library

Association.

National Commission on Writing (2004). Writing: A ticket to work…or a ticket out. College Board.

Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2009). Framework for 21st century learning. Retrieved from:

http://www.p21.org/documents/P21_Framework.pdf

Perry, B. (2010). Exploring academic misconduct: Some insights into student behavior. Active Learning in Higher Education, 11, 97-108. doi:10.1177/1469787410365657.

Pintrich, P. R. & De Groot, E. V. ( 1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom

academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33– 40. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.33

Scanlon, P.M. and Neumann, D.R. (2002). Internet plagiarism among college students. Journal of College Student Development, 43 (2002), pp. 374–385

University of Central Florida. Frequently asked questions: What is information fluency?

http://www.if.ucf.edu/if%20faculty/faq/index.php

Walraven, A., Brand-Gruwel, S., and Boshuizen, H.P.A. (2009). How students evaluate information and sources when searching the World Wide Web for information. Computers & Education, 52, 234-246.

Ward, H. C., & Selvester, P. M. (2012). Faculty learning communities: Improving teaching in higher education. Educational Studies, 38, n. 1, 111-121.

Zhang, X., Majid, S. & Foo, S. (2010). Environmental scanning: An application of information literacy skills at

the workplace. Journal of Information Science, 36, 719-32.

| 79

Zimmerman, B.J. (1990). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview. Educational Psychologist, 29, 3-17. Retrieved from: http://www.unco.edu/cebs/psychology/kevinpugh/moti-

vation_project/resources/zimmerman90.pdf

Zurkowski, P. G. (1974). The information service environment: Relationships and priorities. Washington,

DC: National Commission on Library and Information Science. Retrieved from:

http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED100391.pdf

80 | ETSU QEP

| 81

Appendix A: INtopFORM Summer Workshop

82 | ETSU QEP

Appendix B: Program of Study Invitation to Participate

| 83

84 | ETSU QEP

| 85

Appendix C: Faculty Fellowships: Request for Proposals

86 | ETSU QEP

| 87

Appendix D: Student Support & Engagement Projects, Requests for Proposals

88 | ETSU QEP

| 89

90 | ETSU QEP

Appendix E: Communication Team Activities

| 91

92 | ETSU QEP

Appendix F: Director Quality Enhancement Plan, Job Description

| 93

Appendix G: Director Assessment & Teaching, Job Description

94 | ETSU QEP

Appendix H: INtopFORM Librarian, Job Description

807 University Parkway | Box 70267 | Johnson City, TN 37614

www.etsu.edu