Post on 25-Dec-2015
Swiss Army Assessment
Diana Hartle, Amy Watts
University of Georgia
Assorted Tools for Evaluating Instruction
Measure twice, cut once
• Who or what is being assessed?
• Why is the assessment happening?
• What do you hope to do with your findings?
• Also remember (as if you could forget) your budget, time, and technology constraints.
Paper or Plastic?
How are you going to do your assessment?
• Methodology – quantitative or qualitative?
• What’s your yardstick?
• Collection – Paper? Computerized? Other technology?
For every job, there is a perfect tool
Don’t reinvent the wheel• Do a literature search in library literature.
• Web search for other libraries’ initiatives
• Trawl the listservs – if you’ve already searched the archives and nothing’s there, ask!
• Consult colleagues at your own library and other libraries.
Case Study 1: Peer Observation
Who is being assessed? Teaching librarians
Why is the assessment happening?Continuing professional development
What will be done with findings?Individual librarians can make improvements/adjustments to teaching methods
Case Study 1: Peer Observation (Continued)
Methodology: qualitative
Measurement: None. This is a descriptive process.
Collection method: Written
Case Study 1: Peer Observation (Continued)
Developing the tool; what have others done?
• Evolution of Peer Evaluation of Library Instruction at Oregon State University Libraries, Appendix A: IS Instruction & Training Checklist for Observations
• Data Gathering Tools • Suggestions for Working with Your Peer Coach • Classroom Observation Worksheet • Peer Teaching: How to Get Started
Tailoring to our own needs• Peer Observation Guidelines we developed
Case Study 2: WebCT Quiz
Who or what is being assessed?Information literacy and library skills of students in introductory level classes; librarians who teach those sessions
Why is the assessment happening?Directive from library administration
What do you hope to do with your findings?Demonstrate effectiveness and importance of library instruction; improve teaching in these sessions
Case study 2: WebCT Quiz (Continued)
Methodology: mix of qualitative and quantitative
Measurement: Percentage of questions answered correctly
Collection: Multiple choice/short answer online quiz delivered via course management software
Case study 2: WebCT Quiz (Continued)
Developing tool
• Committee formed
• Literature review conducted
• Examined samples from other initiatives• Consulted ARCL Standards for
Information Literacy http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlstandards/informationliteracycompetency.cfm
• Vetted through colleagues
What else have we put in our toolbox?
Instruction Assessment
• SurveyMonkey quiz for UNIV classes (Nadine Cohen) tinyurl.com/7kek7/ tinyurl.com/qguh6/
• Half-sheet written evaluation for introductory science classes (Monica Pereira) www.libs.uga.edu/ref/evalform.pdf
• Clear/muddy cards (Laura Shedenhelm)
Our colleagues’ toolboxes
Other assessment initiatives at UGA Libraries
• LibQual – Survey developed by ARL to assess and improve service in the Libraries.
• Focus groups for website usability• SLC use of building (focus groups & surveys)• Science Library User Satisfaction Survey• Collection Development faculty needs survey• Library Faculty Job Satisfaction Survey
http://dataserv.libs.uga.edu/assessment/activities.html
Go get your fingernails dirty
Assessment doesn’t have to be painful. Assessment for assessment’s sake will never be fun. But if you go into it with a clear expectation of how you will use your results, everything else will fall into place.
Good luck, and sharp tools are safe tools.