"Can a Course Management System Improve Information Literacy Skills?” Mary McAleer Balkun, Assoc. Prof. of English and Marta Deyrup, Asst. Prof./Librarian, Seton Hall University MARC04 Copyright Mary McAleer Balkun and Marta Mestrovic Deyrup [2004]. This work is the intellectual property of the authors. Permission is granted for this material to be shared for non-commercial, educational purposes, provided that this copyright statement appears on the reproduced materials and notice is given that the copying is by permission of the authors. To disseminate otherwise or to republish requires written permission from the authors.

Context for the Project Seton Hall University is a mid-sized, Catholic university in South Orange, NJ. We have approximately 10,000 students, split between undergraduates and graduates; with approximately 1250 incoming freshman each year. We are benefiting from a mobile computing initiative that began 7 years ago with a few pilots for business and biology majors; the full rollout took place in 1997 with that year’s incoming freshman class. All students and faculty now have lap tops which are refreshed every two years. We have adopted the Blackboard course management system, and every section of each undergraduate and graduate course has a Bb section. We have a wireless environment in all teaching and public spaces on campus.

Undergraduate Library Instruction at SHU Library instruction takes several forms: University Life course for first-semester students. College English I and II, where library instruction is required and is tied to writing assignments. Discipline-specific instruction requested by faculty members for their students. Undergraduates generally go to the library for a one hour session, which does not leave time to actively engage in research.

Drawbacks to Current Instructional Methods Students typically receive library instruction in the second half of the semester. There is no follow-up to the instruction. Students do not interact with the librarian or establish a working relationship that counts. Students often continue to do most of their research on line, and some of them rarely if ever use the university library.

The Plan: Phase I In response to these problems, we decided to try to use the university’s technology infrastructure and the commitment to using Blackboard in first-year English classes to increase the contact between librarians and students. The plan was to enroll a librarian in each section of College English I in the fall 2002 semester, who could then serve as a resource for students. The librarians would initiate the conversation by introducing themselves to each class in which they were “enrolled.” Students would be encouraged to reach out to the librarian with research and other questions. This was an off-shoot of a curriculum development initiative (CDI-4) grant to develop information literacy on campus ( ).

Results: What Worked There was some assessment in place that instructors used with students, such as Carol Kuhlthau’s information literacy assessment test, which showed that students were eager to engage in library research and also saw themselves as savvy researchers (mainly on the Web). Those instructors who were committed to the project and encouraged their students to contact the librarian demonstrated that, with some modifications, the project could work.

Results: What Didn’t Work Information literacy is still a relatively new concept and there are few models to work from. This led to ad-hoc planning. The plan was too ambitious. A librarian was assigned to as many as 15 sections of College English I (although with the expectation that most students would not use this service). With too many students and too many sections, not every librarian had time to participate or bought into the project. There was also no follow-up with a classroom visit, just an initial orientation, then a librarian link in Blackboard. English faculty did not promote this model, mainly because it wasn’t well thought out and was far too ambitious. These instructors also have many other requirements to satisfy in their courses, leaving little time to work on developing this project.

The Plan: Phase II Senior Seminar (spring 2003)/ Women and Literature II (spring 2004) The librarian was added to each course at the start of the semester. She visited the class for a brief orientation in the first few weeks. She also visited the class once again during the semester. After students gave their individual presentations (which served as the basis for each of the two papers they did in each course), they were actively encouraged to contact the librarian (which was easily done through the feature of Blackboard). Students were also offered extra credit to keep a research journal.

The Librarian Perspective Goal: to be as project-oriented and hands-on as possible, starting with the in-class presentation. Asked each student to introduce him/herself and research projects. Tried to engage students throughout the class presentation. Probably important that a whole class was devoted to research. Presented as a person as opposed to “that librarian.” First introduction was through . Students encouraged in class and in s to send questions and concerns. Immediately answered questions if possible or at least began a dialogue via . Students liked working with because of the anonymity and the ability to express themselves in a way that they couldn’t in person. Asked students to continue the discussion if needed and if they were satisfied with the answers they received. Followed up with individual sessions at library; additional class visit.

Student Concerns Here are some of the issues raised in student exchanges with Professor Deyrup: Where to start the research process Figuring our which materials are easier to get through, more valid, and basically just more accessible than others Being overwhelmed by the amount of information available The differences between articles that can be accessed through the library database and traditional books of criticism How to use the full-text databases What kinds of sources to use in other disciplines

Results Students hopefully became more savvy in doing research. They learned the mechanics of navigating library catalogs and databases. They learned to look for information in multiple formats and places. They learned perseverance—to follow up if their questions still hadn’t been answered. Hopefully they learned that doing research can be incredibly exciting. We learned that the role of the librarian in this hybrid format ( /in-class participation) should be as much that of a coach as instructor. All responses should be extremely positive and non- judgmental. We also learned that consistent instructor support is essential and participation ideally should be part of the course requirements; the instructor needs to make time for the librarian in class; the instructor needs to be in regular contact with the librarian.

Future Plans I Spring 2005: Pilot the model in Business Writing courses (now required of all 200+ Business majors); this will be a slightly different version of the project, working with a discipline-specific course and highly motivated students. Fall 2005: Pilot the model in the sections of College English I set aside for developmental students, who traditionally need additional academic support. Both projects will require faculty development workshops for the instructors teaching these courses (some teach both). There will also be at least one meeting prior to and during the semester between the instructors and their partner librarians.

Future Plans II Incorporation of the model into new core curriculum courses that will feature an information fluency component. Exploration of ways to integrate new technologies in development at SHU into this model (using e-portfolios for assessment, Web blogging for journaling, Palm Pilots for communication). Finding ways to make better use of the Discussion Board feature in Blackboard to create an additional forum for engagement between the students and the librarian. Requiring students to keep a research journal as part of their e- portfolios (this is a feature of the new core curriculum plan).