Applying Assessment Results: Promise or Peril? Utah Library Association Annual Conference May 18, 2006 Wendy Holliday Coordinator of Library Instruction Merrill-Cazier Library Utah State University

Presentation Goals Provide practical tips on using assessment in a programmatic way Show how to use “negative” results to your advantage

Case One: English Value-Added Assessment What: Collaboration between English Department, Library, and Office of Analysis, Assessment and Accreditation Compared student essays at the beginning of English 1010 and the end of English Change in score is sign of “value-added.” –Scoring rubric included “use of evidence” –Citation analysis: did students cite outside sources and what did they cite?

Value-Added Results (Micro) 2004Cited sources No sources % % % % All % % 2005Cited sources No sources % % % % All106 26% % Students, in both years, cited websites most often: 2004: 132 (54.5%) 2005: 162 (63.8%) 2005: Only 4 (4%) of students used a print source of any type

Value-Added Results (Macro) Justified ongoing commitment to change library instruction in English 1010 –Increased level of integration: co-created assignment –Increased number of librarian visits –Focused instruction less on search skills and more on introducing different kinds of sources Social capital: –Invited to participate in 2 nd assessment –Data reported at assessment and English conferences –Accreditation bonus points!

General Education Audit Analyzed 192 syllabi from 162 general education courses (68% of all general education courses offered) Looked for information literacy components in assignments and class activities Recorded whether they mentioned the library

General Education Results (Micro) 89 (46%) courses included information literacy assignments 49 (55%) of these assignments required outside sources 20 (22.5%) mentioned the library Area # assignments requiring outside sourcesTotal # of IL assignments BAI0 3 BHU4 6 BLS3 3 BPS2 2 BSS6 9 DHA6 20 DSC6 8 DSS22 38 Totals49 89

General Education Results (Macro) Individual change: –Contacted about adding IL to individual classes Campus change: –General Education Subcommittee will re-examine course requirements and explore ways to better meet goal of information literacy –Will expand IL component of CIL (computer and information literacy) exam Social Capital: –Report sent to statewide general education committee –Accreditation bonus points!

Lessons Learned Don’t just gather data: use it! Focus on long-term goals Don’t fear negative results Build (and use) social capital