Assessment of SUNY GenEd Information Management Competencies

Carleen Huxley, Librarian SUNY Jefferson

WGIL Task force on Information Management

SUNYLA (SUNY Librarians Association)

WGIL (Working Group for Information Literacy)

Our charge – review and recommend

Information Management

Students will: perform the basic operations of personal computer

use; understand and use basic research techniques; locate, evaluate and synthesize information from a

variety of sources

Where do librarians fit in? Information literacy

find, retrieve, analyze and use information Resources for finding information – research Information literacy classes

Previously referred to as bibliographic instruction

Review process - Survey

Sent out to General Education Representatives:

Determine if and how the competencies are being assessed on SUNY campuses

Survey – 23 campuses responded

University Colleges29%

Community Colleges54%

Technology Colleges4%

University Centers13%

schools represented

Schools represented

Is it apparent how the SUNY General Education competency for Information Management is measured on your campus?

Yes, all of them – 20 Yes, some of them – 4No – 1

Assessed by survey or quiz TOTAL: 11

CCLA - 1CLA - 1Developed in-house - 7SAILS - 1TekAssess - 1

1. Perform the basic operation of personal computer use

Assessed through coursework

TOTAL: 11

Computer Science/Info Technology - 4

English Composition - 1

Freshman Orientation - 1

Information Literacy - 1

Unspecified - 4

Other

TOTAL: 3

Library Instruction - 2

Library skills workbook - 1

2. Understand and use basic research techniques

Assessed by survey or quizTOTAL: 9

Developed in-house - 7SAILS - 2

Assessed through coursework

TOTAL: 12

English Composition - 4

Freshman Orientation - 1

Information Literacy - 1

Research and Biostatistics - 1

Not specified - 5

Other

TOTAL: 7

Library instruction - 3

Library skills workbook - 1

Library liaisons - 1

Unspecified - 2

3. Locate, evaluate and synthesize information from a variety of sources

Assessed by survey or quizTOTAL: 6

Developed in-house - 4SAILS - 2

Assessessed through

coursework

TOTAL: 13

English composition – 7

Information literacy -1

Unspecified - 5

Other

TOTAL: 7

Library Instruction – 3

Library skills workbook – 1

Unspecified - 3

Review Process – Special Interest Groups

3T’s 2014: At the Core of Teaching, Transliteracy, Teaching

SUNY CIT 2014: Conference on Instructional and Technology

SUNY Library Association Annual Conference

Common thoughts Covering computer skills and research skills simultaneously. Language too ambiguous. Skills need to translate to multiple mediums and literacies. Students are probably competent and information literate,

but not entirely sure how they become that way. Rely on the law of exposure, learn by doing. Faculty lower their expectations.

RecommendationsAddressing computer skills and

research/information literacy skills separately They need to be treated independently of each other.

Knowing how to use a computer is not the same thing as understanding how to find, evaluate and use information.

Use language more reflective of current pedagogy, responsive to the changing information technology environment.

Other modelsACRL Framework for Information Literacy in

Higher Education

Metaliteracy

AASL Standards for 21st Learner

ACRL Framework Still being revised Threshold concepts

Core tenets in a particular discipline that are transformative, irreversible, integrative, bounded and potentially troublesome. (Meyer & Land, 2006)

ACRL FrameworkConsists of: 6 Frames (thresholds) Knowledge/practices Dispositions

No actual learning outcomes. Meant to function as a paradigm so educators can translate them into measurable outcomes they see fit.

ACRL Framework – 6 Frames

Scholarship is a conversation

Research as inquiry

Authority is constructed an contextual

Format as a process

Searching as exploration

Information has value

Source: ACRL Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education http://acrl.ala.org/ilstandards/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Framework-for-IL-for-HE-Draft-2.pdf

Metaliteracy

• Emerging technologies

• Online communities

• Participatory culture

• Learners as content producersSource: Metaliteracy MOOC http://metaliteracy.cdlprojects.com/

AASL 21st Learner

Inquire, think critically and gain knowledge

Draw conclusions, make informed decisions, apply knoweldge to new situtions, and create new knowledge.

Share knowledge and participate ethically and productively as members of our democratic society.

Puruse personal and aesthetic growth.

Source: 21st Century Learner http://www.ala.org/aasl/standards-guidelines/learning-standards

AASL 21st Learner - Crosswalk

Information Literacy skillsStudents will…

Contribute to the scholarly conversation at an appropriate level (online community, guided discussion, undergraduate research journal, conference presentation/poster).

Critically examine all evidence and ask relevant questions about origins, context, and suitability for the information need of the moment.

Find, evaluate, interpret, manage and use information to answer questions and develop new ones.

Students will understand the value of information as a commodity, intellectual property and/or economic gain.

Basic computer skills Effectively and efficiently use appropriate software

programs in order to succeed in the global workforce. Save and share/transmit information using various file

types (e.g. .pdf, .docx, image) Understand the importance of privacy and ethical use

of information with electronic communication.

Questions What skills are necessary or appropriate for GenEd

Requirement? How do we ensure students will learn these skills? Does addition to or redefining the competencies entice

assessment at a higher rate?

Website http://scoapresentationinfomanagement.weebly.com/

Daempfle, P. (2013). Good science, bad science, pseudoscience, and just plain bunk: How to tell the difference. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Gullikson, S. (2006). Faculty perceptions of ACRL's Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 32(6), 583-592.

Mackey, T., & Jacobson, T. (2010). Reframing information literacy as a metaliteracy. College & Research Libraries, 72(1), 62-78.

McGuinness, C. (2006). What faculty think–exploring the barriers to information literacy development in undergraduate education. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 32(6), 573-582.

Meyer, J. (2014). Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge ( 2 ): Epistemological considerations and a conceptual framework for teaching and learning. Higher Education, 49(3), 373-388.

Oakleaf, M. (2014). A roadmap for assessing student learning using the new Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education,. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 40, 510-514.