+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

Date post: 20-May-2015
Category:
Upload: kristina-devoe
View: 436 times
Download: 1 times
Share this document with a friend
Popular Tags:
39
Kristina De Voe | Temple University Libraries | Philadelphia, PA
Transcript
Page 1: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

Kristina De Voe | Temple University Libraries | Philadelphia, PA

Page 2: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

Wordle art by Palm Beach Community College Library. Available at http://palmbeachstate.libguides.com/seflin2009

Page 3: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

but do they impact student work?

and what about student learning?

Page 4: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

the plan

Identify a course with many sections and a research component

Provide instruction sessions Collect assignments Create, distribute & collect surveys Evaluate assignments Examine surveys Get some answers (hopefully)

Page 5: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0
Page 6: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

Photo by weirdeout. Available via flickr at http://www.flickr.com/photos/weirdedout/2406590192/

Page 7: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

assignment requirements

Identify at least 10 relevant sources must be varied and reflect multiple positions

Include in the annotations: an explanation of why you chose the source a brief summary of the source a brief description of how you found the source a summary of the relevant information

Page 8: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

guides.temple.edu/public_speaking

Page 9: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

instruction sessions

Exposed to the Guide

(experimental)

Not Exposed to the Guide

(control)

Fall 2009

Spring 2010

Fall 2009

Spring 2010

Page 10: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

session outcomes

Able to critically evaluate retrieved sources and determine if the information meets the need of the research problem (ACRL Standard 2)

Able to organize, integrate, and communicate information from a variety of sources to create an annotated bibliography (ACRL Standard 4)

Page 11: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

data collection

Fall 2009

Page 12: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0
Page 13: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0
Page 14: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

Experimental

Control Total Return Rate

Surveys Returned

83 148 231 62.7%

Bibliographies Submitted

15 24 39 10.6%

Page 15: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

annotated bibliography collection and evaluation

Page 16: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

Beginning (1 point)

Developing (2 points)

Competent (3 points)

Excellent (4 points)

Search Tools Used

Types of Sources

Currency of Sources

Authority of Sources

Summarization of Source Content

Evaluation of Source Relevance

Bibliographic Format

Page 17: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0
Page 18: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0
Page 19: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

how did students perform?

Page 20: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

Not a significant difference…?!

Page 21: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0
Page 22: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

survey analysis

Page 23: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0
Page 24: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

Huh?!Wait a minute…

Page 25: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

I did?! Really?!

Page 26: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

where would students like to find guides?

Page 27: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

in the spaces where they already are

Page 28: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

back to that assignment

Page 29: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

control group relied more heavily on faculty and

librarian expertise

Page 30: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

what helped make the assignment easier?

(librarian visit vs. guide)

Page 31: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

*

*

*

Page 32: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

how do students want to get help?

Page 33: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0
Page 34: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

what we learned

Page 35: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

…about ourselves

Too concerned over naming guides

Our rubrics must be more aligned to our faculty’s assignments

F2F still matters

Page 36: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

…about the students

Students will use LibGuides when recommended by librarians or faculty

Students indicate that they find LibGuides help them succeed on assignments

Students appear to struggle with source selection and evaluation How can we use LibGuides to address this?

Page 37: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

what’s next

Page 38: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

the distant future

Assess Spring 2010 sample and compare Fewer sections, more control Required bibliography submission Examine students’ use of sources more

Attempt with distance ed. courses to remove f2f element

Usability studies of guides How do we make them more useful?

Page 39: Enabling Access, Assessing Impact: Subject Guides 2.0

email: [email protected] & data will be avail at:

guides.temple.edu/assessLibGuides


Recommended