8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
1/34
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
2/34
Loyola Marymount University
Private Jesuit and
Marymount universityin Los Angeles, CA
More than 5600
undergraduate and1800 graduatestudents
New $63 millionWilliam H. HannonLibrary
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
3/34
Goals for Revising FEP Library
Instruction
Create standardized intro to research process
Could apply to any topic Develop learning outcomes and tie to ACRL Info
Literacy Competency Standards
Develop scoring rubric to evaluate skills
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
4/34
Content Selection
Applied Jerilyn Veldofs One-Shot instructional
design methodology Prioritized content: need to know versus nice to
know
Task Analysis: steps, teaching points, learningobjectives
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
5/34
Sample Task Analysis
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
6/34
Student Learning Outcomes
1) Given a broad research topic, use the 4W questions (who,
what, where, when) to write a research question.2) Given a research topic, compile a list of search terms or
keywords.
3) Given background information about Google and the Library,
list two differences between the two related to content,organization, or quality.
4) Given a research topic and access to the library's catalog,find relevant books on your topic.
5) Given a research topic and access to a general article indexdatabase (ProQuest), find relevant articles on your topic.
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
7/34
The Worksheet: Module 1
http//:libguides.lmu.edu/ENGL110
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
8/34
The Worksheet: Module 2
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
9/34
The Worksheet: Module 3
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
10/34
The Worksheet: Module 4
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
11/34
The Worksheet: Module 5
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
12/34
LibGuide: Excerpt Module 1
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
13/34
Evaluation: Developing a Rubric
Scoring rubric to assess how well students achieved
learning outcomes Analytic rubric: divides each performance into
separate facets with separate scales
Breaks down 5 learning modules into subsectionswith learning objectives and corresponding ACRLstandards
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
14/34
Rubric: Module 1
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
15/34
Rubric: Module 2
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
16/34
Rubric: Module 3
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
17/34
Rubric: Module 4 part 1
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
18/34
Rubric: Module 4 part 2
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
19/34
Rubric: Module 5 part 1
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
20/34
Rubric: Module 5 part 2
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
21/34
Calibrating the Rubric
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
22/34
Calibrating the Rubric
Objective: reach percent-agreement consensus
among all 8 graders Several rounds of group grading, followed by
rigorous discussion
Tested sample of 20 worksheets by assigning 2independent judges to each
Reached at least 92% agreement
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
23/34
Problem Areas and Revisions
4 Ws- changed to completion (1.a.)
Changed synonyms to keywords and added atotal of (2.b.)
Added or characteristics of (3)
Added criteria for relevancy (2.b., 4.d., 5.d.)
Clearer directions for scoring citations (4 and 5)
Blank answers (all)
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
24/34
Design/Methodology
755 worksheets collected from Fall 2009
100 random worksheets single-graded Graders recorded scores in Google form
Transferred data to Excel file- inserted formulas for
weights Average scores for all modules/subsections
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
25/34
Results
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
26/34
Results: By Subgroup
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
27/34
Discussion: Module 3
Shortened Module 3
and standardized Adapted language
from the ENGL 110textbook to talk aboutinformation quality
Made it more spatialby having visual image
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
28/34
Discussion: Modules 1 & 2
Added additional examples to LibGuide of research
questions Changed worksheet example from eating disorders
to something neutral
Added more keyword practice tools Better reflects cyclical nature of research process-
can add keywords, change research questionthroughout
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
29/34
Discussion: Modules 4 & 5
Changed Modules 4 and 5 to match stated learning
outcome lists citation elements in correct fields Divided Module 4 into elements for citing and
finding
Modified to only 1 book and 1 article rather than 2(relevancy over quantity)
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
30/34
Conclusions
Some limitations of the rubric:
Gray areas in trying to judge good researchquestions and relevancy
Frustration trying to calibrate
Failure of percent agreement method to correct forchance
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
31/34
Conclusions
Led to increased standardization in library
instruction across all freshman classes Led to greater communication of our instruction
goals
Teaching expectations clearer for librarians
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
32/34
Conclusions
Easier to connect our learning outcomes with ACRL
standards Led to improvements in teaching material for lower-
scoring modules
New benchmark for defining success in Fall 2010
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
33/34
Questions?
Links:
Old ENGL 110 LibGuidehttp://libguides.lmu.edu/Fall2009ENGL110
New ENGL 110 LibGuide
http://libguides.lmu.edu/ENGL110
Thank You: LMU Reference Department
Meghan Oakleaf
8/12/2019 Gardner Susan
34/34
CONTACT US:
Susan Gardner [email protected]
Elisa Slater Acosta [email protected]
Top Related