MANSFIELD LIBRARY Kate Zoellner Associate Professor Assessment Coordinator Sue Samson Professor Library Instruction Coordinator Outcomes Assessment 1.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Connecting Libraries to Organizational Mission: Using Assessment to Strengthen the Academic Health Sciences Librarys Institutional Role James Shedlock,
Advertisements

March 2007 ULS Information Literacy and Assessment of Learning Program.
The LibQual+ CUL Assessment Working Group Jeff Carroll Joanna DiPasquale Joel Fine Andy Moore Nick Patterson Jennifer Rutner Chengzhi Wang January.
BEST PRACTICES IN INFORMATION LITERACY ASSESSMENT Yvonne Mery, Vicki Mills, Jill Newby, University of Arizona Libraries February 11, 2009.
LibQUAL+ in the UK & Ireland: five years experience J. Stephen Town and Selena Lock, Cranfield University.
Academic Libraries: Building Campus Partnerships Jeffrey Trzeciak, University Librarian Washington University in St. Louis.
Listening To Our Users Queen’s 2010
Information Literacy Demonstration – Partnership of Faculty and Library Gergana Georgieva Information Literacy Librarian August 25, 2008.
Alcorn State University Information L I N K J. D. Boyd Library.
SEM Planning Model.
Hold the door: Crossing the threshold from ACRL Information Literacy Standards to the new Framework OCULA Spring Conference 2015 Nancy Birch & Christopher.
WASHBURNWASHBURN Friends of Mabee Library October 28, 2004 Standardized Assessment of Information Literacy Skills Presented by Judy Druse Martha Imparato.
1 GETTING STARTED WITH ASSESSMENT Barbara Pennipede Associate Director of Assessment Office of Planning, Assessment and Research Office of Planning, Assessment.
Strike while the iron is hot! Bringing Information Literacy into Campus Assessment Efforts (some rights reserved Scott Adams) Jeanne Davidson & Anne-Marie.
R U There? Looking for those Teaching Moments in Chat Transcripts Frances Devlin, John Stratton and Lea Currie University of Kansas ALA Annual Conference.
1 Wymagania informacyjne uzytkownikow bibliotek akademickich 21 wieku Maria Anna Jankowska University of Idaho Library Biblioteki XXI wieku. Czy przetrwamy?
UWM CIO Office A Collaborative Process for IT Training and Development Copyright UW-Milwaukee, This work is the intellectual property of the author.
Presented by Beverly Choltco-Devlin Reference and Electronic Resources Consultant Mid-York Library System September 25, 2009 REVVED UP FOR REFERENCE CONFERENCE.
Joanne Muellenbach, MLS, AHIP The Commonwealth Medical College Scranton, Pennsylvania June 26, 2012.
Information Literacy Tutorial for the First Time in College Student St. Philip’s College LRC San Antonio, Texas Dr. Adele S. Dendy, Dean of Learning Resources.
1 Focus on Quality and the Academic Quality Improvement Program At Cuyahoga Community College.
Meeting SB 290 District Evaluation Requirements
TM Project web site Quantitative Background for LibQUAL+ for LibQUAL+  A Total Market Survey Colleen Cook Bruce Thompson January.
of Research Libraries Assessing Library Performance: New Measures, Methods, and Models 24 th IATUL Conference 2-5 June 2003 Ankara,
Librarians Prepare for their Global Information Role in the 21 st Century Hannelore B. Rader University of Louisville Louisville, Kentucky, US January.
Library Assessment in North America Stephanie Wright, University of Washington Lynda S. White, University of Virginia American Library Association Mid-Winter.
Reliability and Validity of 2004 LibQUAL+™ Scores for Different Language Translations Martha Kyrillidou Colleen Cook Bruce Thompson ALA Annual Conference.
Types of Assessment Satisfaction of the customer. Satisfaction of the worker. Workflow effectiveness and speed. Service delivery effectiveness and speed.
New Ways of Listening To Our Users: LibQUAL+ Queen’s.
How to participate in LibQUAL+ and effectively utilise the data.
Data Summary July 27, Dealing with Perceptions! Used to quantifiable quality (collection size, # of journals, etc.) Survey of opinions or perceptions.
LibQual 2013 Concordia University Montréal, Québec.
Faculty Survey Results Buswell Memorial Library, 2014.
Communication System Coherent Instructional Program Academic Behavior Support System Strategic FocusBuilding Capacity.
Information Literacy Update: Accomplishments and Initiatives Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe Coordinator for Information Literacy Services and Instruction Office.
Collaborative Assessment: Using Balanced Scorecard to Measure Performance and Show Value Liz Mengel, Johns Hopkins University Vivian Lewis, McMaster University.
Group. “Your partner in developing future Lifelong Learners” UROWNE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY.
BPK Strategic Planning: Briefing for Denpasar Regional Office Leadership Team Craig Anderson Ahmed Fajarprana August 11-12, 2005.
Service priority alignment in Association of Research Libraries (ARL) member libraries Damon Jaggars & Shanna Smith University of Texas at Austin Jocelyn.
Ann Campion Riley University of Missouri
Dr. Lesley Farmer California State University Long Beach
Assignment Design I Katy Sullivan, Reference & Instruction Librarian Albin O. Kuhn Library & Gallery Spring 2004.
1 of 27 How to invest in Information for Development An Introduction Introduction This question is the focus of our examination of the information management.
What could we learn from learning outcomes assessment programs in the U.S public research universities? Samuel S. Peng Center for Educational Research.
ELearning Committee Strategic Plan, A Brief History of the ELC Committee Developed and Charged (2004) CMS Evaluation and RFP Process (2004)
BACK TO SCHOOL Welcome Back! Evaluation Task Force Findings.
University of Texas Libraries Integrating Library Resources with Blackboard TBUG Conference, Fall 2006.
Re-Visioning the Future of University Libraries and Archives through LIBQUAL+ Cynthia Akers Associate Professor and Assessment Coordinator ESU Libraries.
How to participate in LibQUAL+ and effectively utilise the data.
Forging Forward: Using Evaluation as a Stepping Stone Joe Matthews SLA – San Diego Fall Seminar October 30, 2015.
Library Satisfaction Survey Results Spring 2008 LibQUAL Survey Analysis User Focus Team (Sharon, Mickey, Joyce, Joan C., Paula, Edith, Mark) Sidney Silverman.
Information Literacy Module for FYI Available to any FYI Tony Penny, Research Librarian – Goddard Library Research & Library Instruction Services We support.
Information Literacy Module for Majors Available to support any department Tony Penny, Research Librarian – Goddard Library Supporting the Architecture.
Kathy Corbiere Service Delivery and Performance Commission
Catholic Charities Performance and Quality Improvement (PQI)
LibQUAL Survey Results Customer Satisfaction Survey Spring 2005 Sidney Silverman Library Bergen Community College Analysis and Presentation by Mark Thompson,
ClimateQUAL™: Organizational Climate and Diversity Assessment Sue Baughman Texas Library Association April 2009.
LibQual+ Spring 2008 results and recommendations Library Assessment Working Group 11/19/2008 Library Faculty Meeting.
Library Assessment of Research Skills Instruction Tim Held Library May 13, 2011.
Information Seeking Behavior and Information Literacy Among Business Majors Casey Long Business Liaison Librarian University Library Georgia State University,
Our 2005 Survey Results. “….only customers judge quality; all other judgments are essentially irrelevant” Delivering Quality Service : Balancing Customer.
Listening to the Customer: Using Assessment Results to Make a Difference.
Help Me Understand the Basics of Non-academic Assessment A BETHUNE-COOKMAN UNIVERSITY OFFICE OF ASSESSMENT WORKSHOP Presented by Cory A. Potter Executive.
BY DR. M. MASOOM RAZA  AND ABDUS SAMIM
Quantifying the value of our libraries. Are our systems ready?
Assessing Library Performance:
International Results Meeting LibQUAL+TM
February 21-22, 2018.
Curriculum Coordinator: Marela Fiacco Date : February 29, 2015
Information Literacy: What is it and Why Should I Care?
Presentation transcript:

MANSFIELD LIBRARY Kate Zoellner Associate Professor Assessment Coordinator Sue Samson Professor Library Instruction Coordinator Outcomes Assessment 1

LEARNING AND IMPACT Outcome Metrics “The consequences of an individual’s contact with the library.” Learning Outcomes “If students learn from their use of library resources and services… in terms of skills, values, and attitudes.” Impact Outcomes “Concerned with user satisfaction, opinion, and perceptions, including satisfaction with use of the library’s services and programs. They may also include the impact or the effectiveness of library policies and management on services as well as the organizational culture.” Dugan, Hernon, & Nitecki,

INFORMATION LITERACY LEARNING OUTCOMES LIBRARY INSTRUCTION RUBRIC BASED ON THE ACRL INFORMATION LITERACY COMPETENCY STANDARDS FOR HIGHER EDUCATION 1.The information literate student determines the nature and extent of the information needed. 2.The information literate student accesses needed information effectively and efficiently. 3.The information literate student evaluates information and its sources critically and incorporates selected information into his or her knowledge base and value system. 4.The information literate student, individually or as a member of a group, uses information effectively to accomplish a specific purpose. 5.The information literate student understands many of the economic, legal, and social issues surrounding the use of information and accesses and uses information ethically and legally. SCOPE OF THE LIBRARY INSTRUCTION PROGRAM 522 Curriculum integrated classes 10,665 Students 24,789 In-person reference desk transactions 1,000 Virtual Reference transactions 3

Trend Data Numbers Curriculum Integrated Classes Online Student Feedback Online Faculty Feedback Learning Outcomes Peer review of teaching Reference Desk Transactions READ (Reference Effort Assessment Data) Chat Transcript Content Analysis In-office Consultations READ assessment 4 INSTRUCTIONAL ASSESSMENT MEASURES

5

STUDENT AND FACULTY FEEDBACK How might you apply what you learned in this session to your assignment? In your research, what might you do differently based on what you learned in this session? Effective Teaching and Learning Outcomes 6

7

8

LEARNING OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT Example: During spring semester 2014, learning outcomes were analyzed based on the library instruction rubric. Faculty identified the rubrics at each level that are incorporated into their instruction for scheduled classes. Scheduled classes at each level were randomly selected to complete an online set of learning outcomes which were then graded using a 4.0 scale. The Library Instruction Group made recommendations based on these findings to refine and augment the library instruction program. 9

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR INSTRUCTION Emphasize instruction on the following topics: Copyright and plagiarism Develop a list of examples of why copyright matters to students Develop copyright modules Free and fee-based information Legal/economic impact on access to information Survey departmental faculty to identify key concepts from our rubric they consider most important. Reconsider curriculum-integrated approach to information literacy instruction especially in relationship to new ACRL Framework. 10

IMPACT OUTCOMES TOOLS To capture library users’ satisfaction, opinions, and perceptions: Research-Based Focus Groups Interviews Open Feedback Surveys Additional Advisory Groups Liaison Communications 11

Interviews  Faculty Research Practices  Content Analysis  Website Use & Navigation  Code and theme Open Feedback  Feedback Form  Review  No Book  Review Surveys  ClimateQUAL®  Code and theme  Compare with norms  LibQUAL+®  Content Analysis  Compare with norms  Trend across LQ survey years 12 IMPACT OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT

LIBQUAL+® “A suite of services that libraries use to solicit, track, understand, and act upon users' opinions of service quality.” Conducted in spring 2003, fall 2006, and spring 2010; forthcoming spring 2015 Survey includes: 22 core items that measure users’ perceptions of service quality Affect of Service Information Control Library as Place Questions on: General Satisfaction Information Literacy Library Use Demographic Information Open-ended Comment Box Association of Research Libraries,

14

LIBQUAL+® FINDINGS PERCEPTIONS Areas of greatest concern (gap between perceived and desired service levels): A library Web site enabling me to locate information on my own Print and/or electronic journal collections I require for my work Ready access to computers/internet/software (question not on previous surveys) Making electronic resources accessible from my home or office Areas of greatest importance (desired service levels): Print and/or electronic journal collections I require for my work Making electronic resources accessible from my home or office A library Web site enabling me to locate information on my own GENERAL SATISFACTION & AFFECT OF SERVICE General satisfaction increased from 2003 to 2006 to 2010; trajectory parallels that of ARL libraries. Staff are the outlier group, their satisfaction decreased slightly between 2006 and 2010 in terms of their satisfaction with the way they are treated at the library and the library’s support for their learning, research, and teaching needs. Overall rank of Affect of Service: 1.Employees who are consistently courteous 2.Willingness to help users 3.Employees who deal with users in a caring fashion 4.Employees who have the knowledge to answer user questions 5.Dependability in handling users' service problems 6.Readiness to respond to users' questions 7.Employees who understand the needs of their users 8.Employees who instill confidence in users 9.Giving users individual attention 15

Outreach  New employee orientation  Newsletter  Non-academic unit liaisons  Staff Social and workshops Facilities  Comfortable furniture  Quiet study spaces Instruction  Connections with liaison librarians  Workshop series Web Site  Discovery service  LibGuides Collections  E-journals and Electronic resources  Digitization projects  Popular reading materials Services  Chat reference  Exhibits and programming  Software and equipment  Supplies 16 CHANGES MADE BASED ON ALL ASSESSMENTS

CHALLENGES LEARNING OUTCOMES Partnerships with campus faculty Curriculum-integrated information literacy outcomes Access to student work Tracking students across their academic careers IMPACT OUTCOMES Capturing non-users Tracking individuals across their academic careers or employment at UM No clear benchmarks Responding to results 17

BIBLIOGRAPHY Association of College and Research Libraries (2000). Information literacy competency standards for higher education. Chicago, IL: American Library Association. Retrieved from Association of Research Libraries (2014). About LibQUAL+®. Retrieved from Dugan, R. E., Hernon, P., & Nitecki, D. A. (2009). Viewing library metrics from different perspectives: Inputs, outputs, and outcomes. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited. 18

MSU LIBRARY - THE BALANCED SCORECARD The Balanced Scorecard (BSC) is a mechanism to gather assessment data and drive strategic change in an organization. What is unique about the BSC, is that it emphasizes balancing assessment criteria among four perspectives: Financial information Customer (i.e. student and faculty) requirements Internal management processes Innovation and learning The premise is that a structured process to balance several criteria in different categories can lead to better choices and more successful implementation than over-reliance on any one set of factors. This entire process is driven by the desired change-agenda as laid out in organization’s strategic plan. 19

PERSPECTIVES OF BSC PREDICATED ON STRATEGY 20 STRATEGY Financial What do our financial stakeholders expect or demand? Internal Process At what business processes must we excel to drive value for customers? Employee Learning & Growth How do we align our intangible assets to improve our ability to support our strategy? Customer Who are our target customers, what are their expectations, and what is our value proposition in serving them?

BENEFITS OF BSC Foster accountability. Align employees with organizational goals. Enhance resource allocation decisions. Improve collaboration Generate improved financial results. AND … MOST CRITICALLY: Execute the strategy! 21

MSU NATIONAL LEADERSHIP GRANT AWARD Problems: 1.Assessing visitation and use of the digital library is difficult because we lack standards for web analytics, so reporting is full of inaccuracies 2.No comprehensive studies exist to prove that institutional repositories can have a positive impact on author citation rates and, perhaps, university rankings Proposals: 1.Develop standards to improve the accuracy of web analytics reporting 2.Develop an assessment framework to help evaluate the impact of institutional repositories on author citation rates and university rankings 22