In the 2021-2022 AY, the Library Instruction Advisory Committee (LIAC) reviewed the survey tool and procedures for assessing instruction we provide to courses across disciplines. This conversation came after concerns our current survey had accessibility issues and did not collect information that was useful in how we could improve our instruction practices. In addition, we recognized our previous survey tool did not effectively align with other assessment data collected from other departments across campus. Not only would we be able to use improved data to help inform instructional best practices, but the assessment reports can be pulled for each librarian or archivist to include in their Tenure and Promotion packets. The review resulted in LIAC revising the assessment tool used during our scheduled instruction sessions.
The new survey tool was provided to all instruction faculty at the College Libraries to be used starting Fall 2022. To allow for widespread usage despite the varied types of instruction provided (information literacy, digital scholarship, and archival literacy), the survey was designed with two standardized likert scale questions that will be used by all faculty. The information from the likert scale questions measure student awareness and confidence across all instruction. As instruction varies drastically, two open ended questions that can be modified for any given instruction type were also included. These questions may include, but are not limited to, students reflecting on what they learned, what they are still confused by, or providing feedback on an activity or database.
Following a librarian-led instruction session, students demonstrated the ability to identify contextually appropriate resources. (College of Charleston Strategic Plan Pillar I Strategy - Student Experience & Success: "Enable relevant and timely access to scholarly materials, instruction, and services for students, faculty, staff, researchers, and members of the community in support of academic endeavors.")
Strategy 1: Invite students to complete the library instruction evaluation in at least 10% of Research and Instruction sessions held during Fall 2022 and Spring 2023.
Target 1: 70% of students responded on the survey instrument with a 4 or 5 for awareness, and 70& of students responded on the survey with a 4 or 5 for confidence.
Strategy 2: During class, students complete a research activity evaluated by a librarian-created rubric.
Target 2: At least 70% of students score "Fully Met" on the in-class activity.
During Fall 2022 and Spring 2023, Research & Instruction led 140 library instruction sessions. The Library Day research activity and instruction evaluation were offered in 21 (15%) of these sessions. In these 21 sessions, students were given class time to complete these activities; however, not all students chose to submit. Total attendance for these 21 sessions (N) was 445. There were 222 student responses recorded (n) for the instruction evaluation.
220 (99%) of students responded with a 4 or 5 for awareness. 219 (99%) of students responded with a 4 or 5 for confidence. Although the performance target was met, it is worth noting that a greater percentage of students responded with the highest level (5) for awareness (70%) than for confidence (57%).
Yes
As a direct measure to our SLO, the Library Day research activity was offered in 21 (15%) instruction sessions led by Research & Instruction Librarians in Fall 2022 and Spring 2023. From these sessions (N=445), 365 students (n) submitted a completed activity to be evaluated by their instructing librarian. Using the same rubric, each librarian reviewed the submissions for their session(s) and scored each student selected resource as Fully Met, Partially Met, or Not Met as being contextually appropriate.
Of the 365 students, 12 (3%) were scored as having Not Met, 53 (15%) were scored as having Partially Met, and 301 (82%) were scored as having Fully Met.
Yes. Our target was that at least 70% of students would score “Fully Met” on the in-class activity; 82% scored as Fully Met.
1. Meet with Research & Instruction (R&I) unit to discuss assessment results before September 15, 2023.
Our assessment results exceeded our expectations for both measures. However, we recognize that there is some additional interpretation to be considered within our R&I unit. To that end, we plan to present our assessment findings and discuss larger themes of student participation and engagement. For example, the fact that 445 students were recorded having attended the library led sessions, but only 365 (82%) completed the Library Day research activity has potential to be improved upon. Additionally, there is room to discuss how we can implement best practices to our instruction practices to decrease the number of “Partially Met” scores. A meeting with the R&I unit would allow for these conversations to take place and for strategies to be developed and shared across other library instruction units to improve our teaching effectiveness in the library led instruction sessions.
2. Continue our assessment for an additional cycle (2023-2024).
While knowing how students evaluate themselves is useful when measuring it against their actual success in finding an appropriate source, we see a greater value in continuing our assessment of student scored success in completing the Library Day research activity. We propose continuing this assessment through at least 10% of library led instruction during the Fall 2023 and Spring 2024 with a target of at least 80% of students scoring “Fully Met” on the in-class activity. Library teaching faculty will also be encouraged to implement suggestions and best practices discussed in the R&I meeting to close the gap in student attendance and student submissions.
Following a librarian-led instruction session, students demonstrated the ability to identify contextually appropriate resources. (College of Charleston Strategic Plan Pillar I Strategy - Student Experience & Success: "Enable relevant and timely access to scholarly materials, instruction, and services for students, faculty, staff, researchers, and members of the community in support of academic endeavors.")
Strategy: Invite students to complete a research activity evaluated by a librarian-created rubric in at least 10% of research and instruction sessions held during Fall 2023 and Spring 2024.
Target: At least 80% of students score "Fully Met" on the in-class activity.
Measure 1 was not continued in the second year of assessment given the high level of success we had in the previous year.
As a direct measure to our SLO, the Library Day research activity was offered in 22 (15%) instruction sessions led by Research & Instruction Librarians in Fall 2023 and Spring 2024. From these sessions (N=380), 278 students (n) submitted a completed activity to be evaluated by their instructing librarian. Using the same rubric, each librarian reviewed the submissions for their session(s) and scored each student selected resource as Fully Met, Partially Met, or Not Met as being contextually appropriate.
Of the 278 students, 8 (3%) were scored as having Not Met, 35 (13%) were scored as having Partially Met, and 235 (84%) were scored as having Fully Met.
Yes. Our target was that at least 80% of students would score “Fully Met” on the in-class activity; 84% scored as Fully Met.
Yes. Measure 2 had an increase of 2% for students who scored “Fully Met” on the in-class activity.
Meet with the Research & Instruction (R&I) unit to discuss assessment results at a Fall 2024 semester department meeting.
As this was our second and final year conducting this assessment, we will discuss the collective results with the R&I unit to address some observations from the two years. For example, it was discussed with the R&I unit in August 2023 how we might modify our instruction to decrease the number of “Partially Met” scores. While minimal, we did see that reduction from 15% in 22-23 to 13% in 23-24.
Observations from the assessment are important for our department to hear, discuss, and learn from, but the key thing to remember is that we were consistent. In 22-23, 82% of students scored “Fully Met” on the in-class activity, and in 23-24 that increased to 84%. Despite other variables and conditions, the R&I librarians were able to consistently teach students how to successfully locate an appropriate resource for their given assignment and demonstrated their overall teaching effectiveness. Another aspect of this success is that 91% of the courses the in-class activity was used in were First Year Experience or Writing courses (FYE or ENGL 110). The fact that early level research skills were successfully demonstrated by first-year students is encouraging.
By sharing the data collected and continuing to discuss our teaching experiences and best practices, the R&I unit will continue to be well equipped to regularly provide effective library led instruction.
