Cleveland State University
Office of Student Learning Assessment
June 3, 2009
List of Potential Peer Reviewers of General Education Information Literacy Syllabi
Expected number of syllabi to be reviewed: 43
Number of scheduled assessment report review days: 2 (June 17 -30 and/or July 15-31)
1) Birch Browning – Associate Professor, Dept. of Music, College of Liberal Arts
Social Sciences
2) Lynn Deering -
Associate Professor, Dept. of Health, Physical Education,
Recreation, and Dance, College of Education and Human Services
3) Monica Gordon Pershey - Associate Professor, Dept. of Health Sciences, College of
Science
4) Paul Skalski -
Assistant Professor, School of Communication, College of Liberal
Arts and Social Sciences
5) Judy Ausherman - Associate Professor, Dept. of Health, Physical Education,
Recreation, and Dance, College of Education and Human Services
6) Tom Humphrey -
Associate Professor, Dept. of History, College of Liberal Arts and
Social Sciences
7) George Ray -
Associate Professor, School of Communication, College of Liberal
Arts and Social Sciences
We plan on selecting four (4) from the list above for a review day lasting from 8:30 –
9:00 AM to 3:00 – 3:30 PM. Given the number of syllabi to be reviewed and the
complexity of the whole task (see description below), we may have to ask the four faculty
members to come for a second review day. Under these circumstances, we would be
requesting from four (4) to eight (8) faculty stipends.
The whole exercise is intended to determine how various General Education courses
(represented by the syllabi collected from their respective academic departments) support
Information Literacy as a skill area. In this light, the reviewers will be looking for the
following kinds of evidence that support the inclusion of the given skill area:
- Course goals/objectives
- Student learning outcomes
- Instructional resources
- Course assignments (opportunities for students to demonstrate how they meet the
learning outcomes)
- Degree to which the course data align with Information Literacy requirements
1
Cleveland State University
Office of Student Learning Assessment
June 3, 2009
Upon completion of the initial syllabi analysis, we could then determine in which courses
Information Literacy skills are introduced, developed, and then mastered (I, D, and M).
This curriculum map would be then complemented by a comparable document outlining
course assignments supporting the introduction, development, and mastery of
Information Literacy as a skill area (this would represent an assessment map).
In preparation for follow-up conversations (expected to happen during the F’09 semester)
with faculty who teach Information Literacy as a skill area in the General Education
program, we would like to be able to use these curriculum and assessment maps to
determine collaboratively representative student work samples for each one of the
performance levels (I, D, and M) for internal benchmarking purposes. At the same time,
we would be engaging these faculty members in sharing of their scoring rubrics by which
they evaluated student work. Before the end of the Fall ’09 semester, we should have
either a chosen scoring rubric per performance level collected from individual faculty
members (pending their approval for our use) or a set of new scoring rubrics that have
been agreed upon by the instructors who would use them in the evaluation of student
work. If these tools are not ready to be implemented at the end of F’09, then we would
encourage course instructors to do so in the S’10 semester.
2