Teaching Methods Committee Brainstorming Sessions: 1994 - present
- 2002 - Learning With Laughter: Bringing Humor and Creativity into your Teaching
- 2001 - Information Literacy: Right Time, Right Place
- 2000 - Librarians on the Move: Collaboration and Cooperation Techniques that Promote Engaging Learning Environments
ALA Annual 2005 - Brainstorming Session
Saturday, June 25, 2005 3:30-4:30 p.m.
Palmer House Hilton - Wabash Parlor
48 participants
Engaging the Google Generation
The participants sat at small discussion group tables and the room was divided into two so that we could get the first and second questions on the floor at once. The small groups discussed for 20 minutes and then each small group reported back their best idea. We had all groups discuss the third question for 20 minutes and then each small group reported back their best idea. At the end of the session participants were asked to fill out a short evaluation.
Below is a compilation of the notes generated from the session. Groups were asked to submit their notes at the end of the session . Below are the questions and the bullet points represent the notes from each group, duplicate responses have been deleted.
- How can I help students transfer existing web skills to other resources? Access current searching skills
- Parallels to keyword searching
- Google helps explain stop words and spelling problems
- Advanced Google Domain search is like choosing databases
- Identify a keyword
- Basic understanding of Boolean
- Students don’t understand the relationship b/w Google and Library resources
- Students are not afraid to experiment, will new try stuff
- Transfer skills to federated searching/similar underlying concepts
- Use of metaphor to explain Google and library resources differences
- Compare Google to advance search features of databases
- Use web directories as a model for print sources
- Both Google and databases already using Boolean and phrase searching
- How can I incorporate advanced web searching concepts and/or Google Scholar into instruction sessions?
- Wouldn’t use Google Scholar, still in Beta
- Use evaluation examples such as the Godsend Institute
- Do the same search in the Web and databases to compare
- Evaluate credibility of the Web
- Compare the time it takes to compare credibility on the Web to how quickly articles are found in databases
- Teach Google as one of the many tools available.
- Show them tricks/shortcuts
- Read literature/Educause
- Compare and contrast search engines with databases
- Do the same search in Google Scholar as in Databases
- Justify choices, note differences between sources
- How much is full text?
- Some libraries have committees trying to decide whether to place Google Scholar on their homepage.
- Most students don’t know how to do advance searching on the Web. They are not interested in the process but the results.
- Librarians tend to overuse certain databases and should expand by introducing Google Scholar in instruction.
- How can I anticipate and teach to significant changes impacting internet searching?
- Use Blogs.
- Incorporate sites with technologies
- Set up focus groups for student feedback
- Stay current with newsletters and poster sessions
- Watch campus technology changes
- Search Engine Watch - http://searchenginewatch.com/
- Teach EPIC (Museum of the Media History) - http://epic.chalksidewalk.com/
- Rely on experts
- Digests, listservs
- Define info vs. knowledge
- The question is really anticipating, and it is impossible
- Talk to the students
- Start a library blog of your own
- Review blogs on MIT and Cal Tech
- Remember that we’re teaching critical thinking and that the technologies will change, but critical thinking skills won’t
- Have students discuss the good and the bad
- Play devil’s advocate
- Always keep credibility in mind
Session Concluded at 4:30pm.
Minutes Submitted by:
Michelle Jacobs
Intern
ALA Midwinter 2005 - Brainstorming Session
Sunday, January 16, 2005 2:00-4:00pm
Sheraton Boston Hotel - Back Bay C
54 participants
Title: Economic, Legal, and Social Issues, Oh My! - Information Literacy Standard #5 in Practice
Information Literacy Standard #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.
The participants sat at small discussion group tables and the room was divided into two so that we could get more topics on the floor. The small discussion groups on the left side of the room were asked to discuss their question and come up with the top three ideas they had and the small discussion groups on the right side of room were asked to do the same with their question.
The small groups discussed for 30 minutes and then each small group reported back to the rest of the room their findings. After one-side of room finished, individuals from the other side had time to ask questions and make comments. The discussion was particularly lively about plagiarism. We used the same method again with two more questions.
At the end of the session participants were asked to list one idea they would take away from the session and one topic they would like to see in future sessions.
Below are the reports from each of the small groups. In some cases, more comprehensive notes were provided by the group recorder.
Question #1: Plagiarism Prevention & Detection: What's our role?
Group 1
- Education for Students and faculty on how easy it is to detect, Turnitin.com and Google.com as an example.
- Develop partnerships with staff and advisory councils, dean of students.
- Reach out to High Schools and Department of Education, for early prevention.
Group 2
- Offer feedback to Instructors, let them know what we are seeing at the Reference Desk.
- Teaching the big picture/reinforce concepts.
- Develop learning tools, handouts, and tutorials.
Group 3
- Outreach to the writing centers and computer centers on campus.
- Reach out to parents.
- Promote available resources i.e. endnote.
- Develop relationships with faculty.
Group 4 (notes provided by the group)
- outreach - to campus, faculty, writing centers
- feedback to faculty about gaps in student understanding
- creation of learning objects: handouts and tutorials
- promote tools for being organized in research and creating citation pages and citing resources: will help prevent plagiarism and encourage giving credit
- educate, not police
- work on breaking down citations: also helps in evaluating resources
- help students know why it's important not to plagiarize
- help faculty learn strategies for prevention (like creative assignments, using drafts/writing process instead of turning in one final paper)
- educate about plagiarism detection software (doesn't work)
- link plagiarism to teaching what research is: the research process (learning and synthesizing ideas & information into one's own thoughts) is anti-plagiarism.
- Developing a voice to write in, emphasizing revision and participating in an intellectual community
- become a presence in faculty orientation
Whole Group Discussion
- Discuss why it is important
- Work with faculty
- Ethical use and academic integrity
- Students know how to beat all of these detection programs, they don't work. (Study about Turnitin.com)
- The lawsuit in Canada over who owns the rights to a students work.
- Important to educate High School and Middle School students.
- Use concrete examples of how to use other people's ideas.
Resources mentioned during discussion:
- The Plagiarism Plague: A Resource Guide and CD-ROM Tutorial for Educators By Vibiana Bowman, Editor
- Chapter 13 Plagiarism Busters: Free (and Not-So-Free) Web Resources for Plagiarism Detection by Eileen Stec and Dr. Mallika Henry
- Rutgers Plagiarism Tutorial - http://www.scc.rutgers.edu/douglass/sal/plagiarism/intro
Question 2: Copyright: How do we help students understand its importance? Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Resources mentioned during discussion: Question 3: Standard #5: Where does it fit in an overall information literacy program, as well as in a one shot session? Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 (notes provided by group) Group 4 Whole Group Discussion Resources mentioned during discussion: Question 4: Free vs. fee-based access: What are some strategies to teach students the difference? Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 (Notes provided by group) Group 4 Group 5 Resources mentioned during the Discussion: Session Concluded at 4:00pm. Minutes Submitted by: ALA 2004 Annual Conference, Orlando, Florida Collaboration Counts: Librarians and faculty team up for student success. Question 1: Please share your successes and challenges in creating new collaborations with faculty. You might want to include recruiting, marketing, preparedness, and creating a environment conducive to information literacy. Group 1: Group 2: 1. Campus teaching support office to be liaison between library and the academic faculty. Group 3: 1. Persistence – over time – programs take a long time to build Group 1: 1. They want a specific topic, like plaigiarism or copyright Group 2: Group 3: Question 2: What are the successes and challenges in incorporating information literacy into curriculum: You might want to include: Content, Structure, Sustainability, and Staffing? Group 1: Group 2: 1. Library support from above Group 3: 1. Talk to supervisor Challenges: Group 1: Group 2: Group 3: Sunday, January 10, 2004 Headcount: 61 total Introduction (Mark Emmons): It was explained that we were tackling Standard #4 : Helping students to use the information that they find. It was explained that questions to whole room will be discussed at each table, then recorded on flip charts. Each group will then report their top 3-5 categories. We were reminded of standard 4: “The information literate student, individually or as a member of a group, uses information effectively to accomplish a specific purpose.” 1) What does it mean to use information effectively? Table 1: Table 2: Table 3: Table 4: Table 5: 2) How can librarians teach students and partner with faculty to use information effectively? Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 3) Share successes & challenges that you have experienced in each of the following: Table 1: Successes: Challenges: Table 2: Challenges: Successes: Table 3: Challenges: · Resistance from faculty to having instruction. Successes: · Some people bring up accreditation Table 4: Successes: Challenges: Table 5: Challenge/ opportunity: Challenge: Success: Wrap up discussion: One person reported that he had used Weblogs in genealogical research class at University of South Florida. He started off with USF servers, then found other places for free Weblogs. Students created Weblogs, then sent professor the address, could see each entry, and of course all date and time stamped. Could see where frustrations were, what they were doing. Commented that this got around problems of paper based research logs. He suggested that blogging is popular, students will not be resistant. Another person reported that she had worked with freshman seminar and used Weblogs so students could chat and reflect. Announcement: Future of ACRL IS section is at 4:30 in this building. Request: It was requested that participants a one minute paper to evaluate the session. The focusing question was “Based on today: Is there anything that you plan to do differently. Also: Please let us know of topics that you would like to see in future.” The meeting was adjourned at 4pm. Respectfully submitted, John P. Renaud, Intern Saturday, June 21, 2003 4:30-5:30pm The session was structured around three questions dealing with Information Literacy Standard #3 – Evaluation of Information. There were 43 people attending and they were divided into five groups with a Teaching Methods committee member facilitating each group. Each group had a discussion about each of the three questions with the groups reporting back after each discussion. Below is a summary of the ideas generated. Question 1: Who is responsible for teaching evaluation of information? How do you get faculty involved? COLLABORATION IS KEY Librarians should be responsible because they are familiar with information sources through everyday work. POTENTIAL BARRIERS: New faculty don’t define well what they’re looking for in assignments POSSIBLE STRATEGIES: Gentle nudges/suggestions to faculty during library instruction sessions WHERE DOES IT FIT -- IDEAS/ACTIVITIES? When in the process do you teach it? Question 2: What evaluation criteria do you teach for Web sites and print resources? Compare scholarly vs. popular Currency (varies by discipline) Criteria depend on the information need and student’s context - Who do they want to hear from? Many 50-minute instruction sessions are now directed at evaluation, not finding information (Most students can find information in some format but can’t differentiate or ‘rate’ it.) Question 3: How do you incorporate evaluation criteria into a one-shot instruction session? Fit in one hour: prioritize and break in to parts. Most time focused on databases. Some time focused on scholarly vs. popular. Submitted by January 26, 2003 -- Philadelphia, PA "Assess This!?! Assessing Student Learning and Making it Count" Approximately 50 people participated in the dicussion. Nicole Auer, Chair of the Teaching Methods Committee of the ACRL Instruction Section, and committee member Beth Ashmore served as overall facilitators. Small groups were facilitated by committee members Patty Durisin, Beth Ashmore, and Mark Emmons. Nicole opened the meeting with a passage from T. A. Angelo's book, Classroom assessment techniques: a handbook for college teachers. The brainstorming session was set up to primarily focus on one-shot instructions. The participants were divided up into four groups. The group then discussed in their small groups the following questions: 1) Thinking of your typical class, what were/would be the 3-5 skills/concepts you want students to know when they leave? The four groups reassembled as one large group and shared highlights from their respective small group. Major and recurring themes from each of the small groups were: 2) Given those skills, how do/would you assess student learning? The four groups reassembled as one large group and shared highlights from their respective small group. Major and recurring themes from each of the small groups were: 3) What do/can you do with the data? As the larger group, the participants shared the following ideas: Following this discussion, participants discussed as a large group their experiences linking their assessments to other student learning assessment initiatives such as campus-wide, state-wide, or via their accrediting agency. For more information: Please refer to our Selected Bibliography. Recorder: Beth Ashmore, Committee Member & Anna Van Scoyoc, Intern "Teaching with the Information Literacy Competency Standards: Begin at the Beginning� What is Information? What is an Information Need?" Approximately 50 people participated in the brainstorming session. Mary MacDonald, Chair of the Teaching Methods Committee of the ACRL Instruction Section, welcomed everybody and opened up the discussion. Participants introduced themselves and signed an attendance sheet. The participants were divided into six groups. They were given about 30 minutes for the discussion, and then each group had a representative to report to the entire group. Ideas for in-class exercises from Group 1: Ideas for assignments from Group 1: Ideas for in-class exercises from Group 2: Ideas for in-class exercises from Group 3: Ideas for in-class exercises from Group 4: Ideas for assignments from Group 4: Ideas for in-class exercises from Group 5: Ideas for in-class exercises from Group 6: Recorder: Jing Qiu January 20, 2002 - New Orleans, LA "Learning With Laughter: Bringing Humor and Creativity into your Teaching" Icebreakers Joan opened the "Icebreakers" portion of the Brainstorming Session with, appropriately enough, an icebreaker, asking attendees at each of the four discussion tables to brainstorm icebreaker activities/ideas at their respective tables. Participants were given ten minutes to discuss, and take notes on, ideas generated. At the conclusion of the ten-minute period, a representative from each table reported to the entire group on their tableÕs discussion. Ideas from Table One: Ideas from Table Two: Ideas from Table Three: Ideas from Table Four: From the presenters table: Additional icebreaker suggestion from attendees: Summary of Icebreaker session Recorder: Mara Houdyshell Props Nicole Auer, a committee member from Virginia Tech, introduced this segment of the discussion. She set the framework for this part of the session with the idea that props include physical objects (such as a can of Coca-Cola) or analogies to explain concepts, library terminology and research methods to students. Nicole presented several reasons why librarians may want to consider using props and/or analogies in a library instruction session: Examples of physical props librarians have used include: For more information, please refer to our Bibliography. January 13, 2001 - , Washington, DC "Information Literacy: Right Time, Right Place" Respectfully submitted, "Librarians on the Move: Collaboration and Cooperation Techniques that Promote Engaging Learning Environments" 27 people gathered for this brainstorming session. Nancy Dewald began the session by introducing the topic and describing the three categories for the breakout sessions: Summaries of these discussions follow. Partnering with Faculty -- Joan Campbell Learning Communities The moderator began with a brief introduction. Learning Communities are a way of organizing the curriculum. They often involve linking 2 or more courses so that a relatively small cohort of students (10-30) attends a cluster of classes together. Learning communities share some basic principles: they stress student collaboration, faculty collaboration, integration of the curriculum, and they often focus on first-year students. Members of the group with experience in Learning Communities added that clusters of courses are often unified around a general theme and that foundation courses (such as freshman composition) are often included in the clusters. A question was raised about the numbers of students reached by library instruction classes in learning communities and about the resources required to teach these classes. It was acknowledged that relatively small numbers of students are reached in a class, that significant resources (staff and time) are required, and that this is an important consideration for planning to participate in learning communities. It was commented that because learning communities stress collaboration they provide librarians with an opportunity to work closely with faculty in other disciplines to create course integrated library instruction. The emphasis on integrating the curriculum encourages connecting library instruction to other course content. It was also commented that participation in learning communities may provide librarians with an opportunity to discuss with faculty and administrators the ACRL standards for information literacy competencies and the role of library instruction in the curriculum. It was asked how faculty, including librarians, are recruited to participate in learning communities programs. It was the experience of discussion group members that faculty participate voluntarily. Lastly the discussion turned to pedagogy in learning communities. Learning communities often stress teaching methods, such as active learning and student collaboration, that are widely used in library instruction. Therefore, librarians may not only be comfortable teaching in a learning communities setting, they may be in a position to make a strong pedagogical contribution. -- Ross A. Christensen Other Partnerships Collaboration between the library, ITD and New Student Programs has been ongoing since the initial orientation module was created, allowing the module to be updated and revised as necessary. The main challenge of the collaboration was establishing common goals for each team member to work towards. While this can be a time consuming process, due to the various perspectives of the people involved, developing a shared set of goals and objectives is essential to the success of any project. Other Possibilities for Collaboration -- Shellie Jeffries Continues: Brainstorming Sessions, 1994-1999
- Use music as an example; Napster
- Explain the consequences.
- Teach them how to personalize an idea
- What are the rules?
- Accentuate the positive, do not jump to the negative approach
- Use relevant examples such as images and music
- Look into available tutorials tied to trademark issues
- Integrate it into the curriculum without making it boring
- Trademark vs. copyright what are they and do they effect you (students)
- How you can use things rather than how you can't
- Uses websites as example- show how some copyright content and how others allow you to use whatever you want as long as you give credit.
- Exercise using Google Images- What can be used? Have them seek permission to use the image. What is the result.
- Teach them about their own work-when they write a paper or create a website who can use it?
- Legal implications in the work place.
- Brigham Young University Copyright Tutorial - http://lib.byu.edu/departs/copyright/tutorial/intro/page1.htm
- Work with the office of Intellectual Property or the equivalent and develop a workshop
- Work with Judicial Review Board or equivalent so that students who are brought before the board must then meet with a librarian.
- This provides librarians an opportunity to both teach and introduce important resources.
- Work with the writing center and campus tutors to make sure information is consistent across campus.
- Develop faculty workshop
- Try to include IL statements on all syllabi - what is it
- Work with departments administration to involve new faculty
- Show them tools that they can use in the classroom
- Present workshops for faculty
- Have campus-wide plagiarism statement in all syllabi
- Add resources to web page
- Listserv for staff & faculty about ethical use of information issues
- Offer a forum for faculty (with food!)
- Encourage creative assignments
- Send tips to faculty
- Be positive!
- Be involved in administrative bodies: J board, for example (students who infringe can be required to meet with librarian to learn how to use information resources more effectively - as a prevention measure)
- Be involved in new faculty orientation
- Work with the office of intellectual property/legal office to create standards
- Integrate standards with curriculum: take advantage of freshmen seminars to present this information
- Be mindful of the need to use language that resonates with different communities on campus: administration, legal, academic affairs, etc.
- Work with the center for academic excellence to create connection with faculty
- Bring in guest speakers to departments on campus
- Online tutorials
- Use the freshman orientation to promote the importance of IL
- Maybe changing the name Information Literacy to something less library jargonish
- Include IL in learning outcomes for the university
- Information Commons- works with all departments
- Work with the center of Academic Excellence - some libraries have the center contained in them.
- Have another department host a lunch in the library or Information Commons.
- Stay away from Library Jargon- look into terms that the disciplines use.
- USC Information Commons
- Use analogies - Walmart vs. Nieman Markus - Abercrombie and Fitch; What is in your closest vs. buying new clothes
- Website evaluation form
- Look at difference in free web- such as Satire sites that look reputable
- Show how the library catalog stops you when you make a mistake - by finding no results.
- Show real life examples
- You get what you pay for.
- The web is not any faster- show a side-by-side comparison.
- Reinforce the cost of the library databases and how they pay for it as students
- Show how students who use library databases get better grades.
- Stress pre-evaluation of web sites: who produced? when? to what end?
- Make sure the faculty won't accept just anything from students
- Compare searches: library resource/Google/deep web
- Include resources that are free and reliable and scholarly
- Discuss the costs of databases: demystify
- Emphasize what free resources and the superficial web are good for, and what to do with the information you find there
- Can't rely on free vs. fee distinction, or even deep/superficial web: it really comes down to evaluating resources: each student needs to have the ability to do this; there is no substitute for critical thinking
- Remind them not to pay, but to check their library first!
- Stress cost of Databases
- Show how free often leads to fee for full text
- Explain peer review process
- You do find good things on the web, you need to know how to search for those
- James Neal: "order breeds habit while chaos breeds life." The distinction between free vs. fee is no longer entirely valid schoogle/Google Scholar is good, some libraries link to it from their site.
- Manage free website lists on your library page
- Lots of time the pay sites are missing content that can be fund for free on the web
- It all comes down to evaluation of what is out there
- http://schoogle.blogspot.com/
- http://www.scirus.com/srsapp/
- http://graylit.osti.gov/
- http://jnul.huji.ac.il/rambi/
Michelle Jacobs
Intern
Saturday, June 26, 2004
10 guests
Successes
1. Taking specific topic and morph it into information literacy.
2. Multiple short visits to class
3. Identify courses with research component
2. Less work for faculty [to have information literacy “done” by library]
3. Market to graduate students
2. Meeting their needs
3. Teaching a credit course
Challenges
2. They only want to give up one class for a one shots
3. How to be sure you are reaching everyone
1. Difficulty contacting adjuncts
2. Academic faculty and librarians who do not buy into information literacy
3. Making information literacy more relevant to the faculty
1. not having faculty status
2. time
Successes
1. Demand certain preparedness
2. Preparing materials to support faculty integrating IL into their classes on their own
3. Get into the curriculum so that students are getting different content at different levels
2. Online tutorials
3. Market to academic department’s standards
2. Quality of instruction, not quantity
3. Providing instruction where students are (Chatting, etc.)
1. Students not ready for research
2. Don’t want marginalize what librarians do by giving them materials to use on their own
3. Students get repeats
1. Faculty turnover
1. Time and staffing
2. How do we know we are being successful?
Evaluation: List one idea that you will take away from this session. Suggest a topic to brainstorm at a future session.
Grand Manchester Hyatt, San Diego
· Offering to do things for them
· Faculty see successes of students
· Grant to integrate technology – pairing librarians with IT
jrenaud@miami.edu
ALA Annual, Toronto
Split responsibility between librarian and faculty
Librarian has to initiate the collaboration
Important to differentiate between computer literacy and information literacy
It may be necessary to explain to faculty what we mean by Information Literacy
Information Literacy “push” needs to come from administration higher up
What is the difference in the way that librarians and faculty teach evaluation of information?
General vs. specific criteria
Problems in articulation of criteria
Guidelines vs. lists of sources
Faculty have knowledge base of information
Metalearning (process of learning) vs. critical thinking about the discipline
Levels of criteria (librarian as generalist; faculty in specific discipline)
Repetition works where other strategies don’t
Reinforcement from professor is helpful
Instruction required by instructor carries more weight
Information Literacy instruction incorporated into course content is most effective
Easier to incorporate in freshman composition; harder in disciplines like business, etc.
Must be stressed as important by librarian and faculty for students to take it seriously
Collaboration with faculty before information literacy instruction imperative – evaluation may not be what faculty want covered.
Faculty reluctant to ask for help
Whether librarians have faculty status can influence this as well
Faculty don’t know what is possible/impossible in library (example: scavenger hunt assignment
Can’t do everything in one session
Selling to faculty
Faculty already not satisfied with students’ sources; that’s why they come to us
Adjusting to situation (How to respectfully disagree with a teacher)
Faculty don’t want model assignments from librarians
Get syllabus from faculty if possible / use as conversation starter
Require professor to attend the library instruction session WITH the students
Partnering with faculty
Use technology as an inroad (faculty have less of a comfort level and are more willing to hand over to librarian)
Establish relationships with faculty
Lunch
Departmental meetings
Accreditation visits can be a motivating factor
Faculty can sell idea to other faculty
Don’t be afraid to say No if:
Faculty don’t send over assignment
Faculty can’t attend session
One-credit Information Literacy course with lab for graduates (graded). Librarians initiated this. Small university. Librarian meets individually with all new faculty. Librarians are members of university teaching & learning committee.
Insert into class outside library instruction session
With class reading assignments
Different kinds of evaluation at different stages (saves time for professors later)
Need faculty assignment Web site
Evaluation at the beginning, What is the information need?
Ask why are you here?
What do you do when you research?
What kind of information? (Where is it?)
It depends – sometimes best for librarian, other times best for faculty
Evaluation part of everything
Evaluation, compare and contrast different articles Use as initial exercise.
Faculty involvement
Find an example of article misinterpreting studies
Use good assignments as examples
Reality behind claims in the popular media
Faculty ARE concerned – content is already a concern of theirs
Depends on student population? (area of study, level of students)
At Reference Desk we do this at ‘point of need’
Depends on timeframe with students, often last thing on agenda
Using a Web tutorial (10-15 minutes) with form to submit for credit – for how to evaluate Web resources
Wolfram University Web site presents different criteria for Web vs. paper
Have students generate criteria
Show example of a resource with dubious authority - “phony” Web sites
Comparing resources with different perspectives on the same issue
Difference between items retrieved in Google vs. subscription resources
Examining authority for hidden bias. Who “owns” the source?
If even faculty don’t understand the importance of using subscription databases, it’s an added challenge.
Older materials can still be useful
New doesn’t always mean good
In context sometimes need retrospective view
Varies by discipline
Gaps in data
Sometimes there are legitimate things on the Web that are older
Purpose/Audience
Authority (Reliability/Credibility – scholarly/popular) – author and publisher and affiliation
Author: credentials (how to establish this? – engage with content)
Bias/Objectivity (Perspective/Point of View), i.e., .gov sites
Accuracy
Print vs. Web (criteria applicable to both)
Authority and responsibility are more of an issue with Web sites.
Source – on Web takes a new dimension
Stability is an issue on the Web
Same criteria for Web & print? Sometimes. Structure is similar – false dichotomy (format is a red herring)
Advertising important – faculty are often unaware of services we can provide
Faculty have difficulty ‘building assignments’ so that they can evaluate how students are evaluating information sources
(First step may be to grade an annotated bibliography before paper is written. Students and faculty are missing importance of process.)
New faculty seem most receptive to instructional services
Use the hour to whet their appetite to learn more on their own.
Take one scholarly article/journal and ask students to identify differences between it and what they last read
Offer library workshops/seminars. Convince some faculty to require students to attend.
Distribute handout listing criteria
Talk about with instructor
Apply via example
Discuss
Decide reliable for research?
Checklist to use while looking at resource
Citation and abstract example (from databases)
Question sheet attached
Each student answers questions
Discuss as a class
Select Web sites to be evaluated by authority and work from those.
Extend session, pre-exercise frees up time
Use handouts/worksheets
Start with evaluation as introduction
Discuss scholarly literature, pre-exercise examples of citation/abstract with worksheet students complete, then discuss as group
Post activity – reinforce with later interactions with students at reference desks
At every stage, evaluate research tack (Which database is "good"?)
Database advisor tools
Librarians should be seen as resource for evaluation
Brand library materials whenever possible
Exercises: Fake Web sites? Who uses them?
Do hands-on experiments or visual aids to show method for developing a hypothesis, etc. Leads to critical evaluation /thinking.
Tie to picking a ‘researchable’ topic
One idea: Find a ‘news’ article on a topic that lends to original research. Allow comparisons.
Difficult to do evaluation in a one-shot session – often just little ‘snips’ of evaluation can be included throughout
May work best if ‘active’ – short lecture then have them do it.
Students need to be in ‘driver seat’ (Trade off; don’t keep one student in this position/hot seat).
Who/what/when/where/why/how?
Look at statistical methodology in particular field
Electronic journals – do we worry about distinction from print?
Private Internet vs. “Public” Internet (fee vs. free)
Notion of filtering – if we pay for it we must have done some evaluation
Peer-reviewed concept (Found via database info supplied on journal/magazine, or Ulrich’s, etc.)
Tie to visual differences (Rolling Stone vs. Scholarly music journal)
Reinforcement of concepts important
Students may hear but do not learn/internalize after one session
Working with faculty/collaboration seems to be key
“Effective communication” as a curriculum requirement includes information literacy component
Can be included in individual courses as in a library courses=institutional level commitment for information literacy
Accrediting bodies may play a role if ‘mandates’ are included/passed down
Ask for second 50-minute session
Assign something before they come to class
Build assessment into all parts of the session
Evaluation of the assignment itself, esp. for graduate students
Terry Taylor (Recorder)
Discussion facilitated by Joan Campbell of Wellesley College
Nicole referred to research and resources which reinforce the value of using analogies (see our Bibliography).
Participants at the session brainstormed at their respective tables about props and analogies they have used successfully in library instruction sessions.
Examples of analogies librarians have used include:
Recorder: Tammy Sugarman, Georgia State University
Laurie Alexander, Chair, convened the meeting. (There were 46 people present for the brainstorming session.)
Mary MacDonald, a committee member from University of Rhode Island, began the brainstorming session
Information literacy skills for undergraduates
Information literacy skills for graduate students
Information literacy skills for faculty
Rebecca Bichel
Intern
January 24, 2001
Other topics discussed:
The Shapiro Undergraduate Library at the University of Michigan, in order to participate more meaningfully in the campus-wide Freshman Orientation, contacted the University's Information Technology Department and the New Student Program department to help create an interactive library component to the orientation. Comprised of one representative from each department (ITD, Library and New Student Programs), the team designed a module that consisted of a video tape, faculty presentation and hands-on tutorial. Each department shared the costs of development and production.
Summary
