Align CofC Libraries’ Information Literacy Instruction with ACRL Framework for Information Literacy and curricular Program-level Competencies.
In an effort to move beyond traditional “one shot” bibliographic instruction sessions and to be more fully integrated into the college curriculum, College of Charleston Instruction Librarians would like to develop information literacy instruction that aligns with program-level competencies. At present, through first year programs including ENGL 110 and FYE, the Research and Instruction Services Department has aligned programmatic student learning outcomes with two competencies: Authority Is Constructed and Contextual and Scholarship as Conversation. The outcome for the coming year will be to develop “next step” information literacy instruction that builds on concepts introduced in first year courses and is targeted to discipline specific research methods so that students will gain information gathering and assessment skills necessary for exemplary capstone coursework.
Measure 1: Artifacts from designated research methods classes will be independently scored using a rubric to determine effectiveness of Information Literacy instruction.
Performance Target: 70% of students will achieve a score of 3 or better on a 4 or 5 point assessment rubric.
Measure 2: Students will be surveyed following the completion of their major research assignment to determine their assessment of the usefulness of the Information Literacy instruction that they received.
Performance Target: 80% of students will indicate that they were satisfied or very satisfied with the Information Literacy instruction they received.
Strategies: Work with faculty teaching research methods sections in the Political Science and Human Health and Performance programs to deliver targeted Information Literacy instruction and acquire redacted student artifacts -- final research projects -- to be scored by independent reviewers. Compare scores from classes that had librarian-led Information Literacy instruction with those who did not. In addition to these direct measures, surveys and/or focus groups will be administered to students who have received Information Literacy instruction in order to gauge their satisfaction and engagement.
Measure 1: Measure not completed. See description below.
Measure 2: Measure not completed. See description below.
Target met for measure 1? N
Did results for measure 1 demonstrate improvement from previous assessments? N/A
Target met for measure 2? N
Did results for measure 2 demonstrate improvement from previous assessments? N/A
Please describe your selections above for each measure:
Target measurements for our goal were not met. Although the Public Health Department expressed interest in participating in the pilot, scheduling conflicts resulted in postponing implementation for the ‘18-’19 academic year.
Public Health faculty were briefed on the goals and learning outcomes at the April departmental meeting and invited to participate in a survey (Google Forms) designed to elicit faculty perspectives and preferred methods of delivery of Information Literacy instruction including the following:
Five faculty completed the survey which included all Public Health faculty present at the department meeting attended by library faculty.
Based on assessment of these results and in consultation with the Wes Dungeon, Public Health Department Chair, a proposal for implementation will be presented to Public Health Faculty.
Measure 1: Library faculty hope to use the remaining time before the semester starts to coordinate with selected Public Health faculty with the goal of implementing the information literacy program into introductory courses curriculum.
Measure 2: Library faculty will work on creating a survey that we can use to achieve Measure 2.
Implemented Strategies: We have discussed the findings with Public Health faculty.
Planned Strategies: Our next step is to begin implementing the IL program into introductory Public Health course curriculum.
