Assessment #2
(Assessment of content knowledge in the field of library media)
Description of Assessment and Use in Program
Assessment #2 is the pathfinder, required in EDSL560, Informational Sources and
Services. With this assessment, candidates collaboratively develop a pathfinder related to an area of content study, identifying quality resources for student use and guiding students in the use of those resources, creating a supporting learning environment for student learning.
How Assessment Aligns with Standards Cited
The pathfinder aligns with standard 1.1 as candidates model a variety of strategies to locate, evaluate, and use information in a variety of formats for diverse purposes, communicate, model, and teach legal and ethical policies, demonstrate effective use of current and relevant information processes and resources, and plan traditional and electronic reference services that address user needs; 1.3 as candidates facilitate access to information in print, nonprint, and electronic formats, plan strategically to ensure physical and intellectual access to information, provide remote access to information, and promote the tenets of intellectual property; 1.4 as candidates demonstrate collaborative techniques as they create and maintain a positive educational climate in a technology-rich library; 2.1 as candidates design library instruction that assesses learners’ information needs and support the learning of all members of the learning community; 2.2 as candidates create, implement, and evaluate student learning experiences in partnership with teachers and other educators, documenting the impact of their contribution to student learning; 2.3 as candidates integrate information literacy skills into the content curriculum, incorporate technology to provide efficient and equitable access to information beyond print, and facilitate students’ use of technology to access and analyze information; 3.2 as candidates model, share, and promote ethical and legal principles of education and librarianship and share their expertise in instructional design and assessment with colleagues; and 4.1 as candidates plan for efficient and equitable access to resources and technology to meet diverse user needs.
Analysis of Data Findings
During the 2006-2007 academic year, 84 candidates enrolled in EDSL560, Informational
Sources and Services, completed the pathfinder assignment. All candidates earned an overall acceptable or target score on the assignment. There were no unacceptable scores.
During the 2007-2008 academic year, 73 candidates enrolled in EDSL560, Informational
Sources and Services, completed the pathfinder assignment. All candidates earned an overall acceptable or target score on the assignment. There were no unacceptable scores.
During the 2008-2009 academic year, 26 candidates enrolled in EDSL560, Informational
Sources and Services, completed the pathfinder assignment. All candidates earned an overall acceptable or target score on the assignment. There were no unacceptable scores.
In fall 2009, 11 candidates enrolled in EDSL560, Informational Sources and Services, completed the pathfinder assignment. All candidates earned an overall acceptable or target score on the assignment. There were no unacceptable scores.
How Data Provides Evidence for Meeting Standards
1

Assessment #2
Examination of data by standards addressed on this assessment demonstrates that all candidates performed at the acceptable or target levels for mastery of standards 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 2.1,
2.2, 2.3, 3.2, and 4.1.
Assessment, Scoring Guide, Candidate Data
Assessment Tool/Description of Assignment
EDSL560: Informational Sources and Services
Pathfinder
pathfinder
A subject bibliography designed to lead the user through the process of research ing a specific topic , or any topic in a given field or discipline , usually in a systematic, step-bystep way, making use of the best finding tool s the library has to offer. Pathfinders may be print ed or available online . See also : topical guide .
Reitz, J. M. (2004). ODLIS: Online Dictionary for Library and Information Science.
Retrieved
April 7, 2005, from http://lu.com/odlis/odlis_p.cfm
School library media specialists have typically provided pathfinders for their students, first in paper format in three-ring notebooks and now online on school library web pages. (A note here: some library media specialists philosophically object to the concept of pathfinders, believing that students should be able to research and find information for themselves. I prefer to think of pathfinders as scaffolds for research: they point the student to good resources and encourage the use of formats that might not otherwise be thought of. Obviously, pathfinders are not needed for all research nor are they appropriate in all settings for all students.)
As we work to collaborate with teachers as instructional partners and to incorporate information literacy skills instruction into the content area curriculum, we can use pathfinders as teaching tools. They provide research guidance to the student when we are not physically present to guide. And, they don’t hurt in the area of public relations either! Students, parents, and teachers alike appreciate the instructional and research assistance that they provide. On the school library media web page, they greatly increase our visibility and reflect our concern for student achievement. They highlight our efforts to connect library, information literacy, and content study—at the same time promoting good, quality resources.
What might one of these critters look like, you ask? Well, take a look at the links provided on your syllabus:
Pathfinders:

Thomas Dale High School, Kathy Lehman and Lori Donovan, http://chesterfield.k12.va.us/Schools/Dale_HS/library/Virtlib/class.htm

Manchester High School, Lois Stanton and Catherine Welsh http://chesterfield.k12.va.us/Schools/Manchester_HS/Library/pathfinders.htm

Springfield Township High School, Joyce Kasman Valenza http://mciu.org/~spjvweb/pathfinder.html
2

Assessment #2

John Newbery Elementary School, Wenatchee, WA, Library Media Center Web site http://nb.wsd.wednet.edu/lmc/pathfinders/pathfinder.htm

Internet Public Library site , http://www.ipl.org/div/pf/
This assignment will consist of two parts:
Part One, your explanation and rationale for your pathfinder, which will include
1.
SOL/Topic you have selected
2.
Brief introduction setting the stage for me to understand the context in which you/your students will be using this pathfinder
3.
Description of the collaboration that occurs related to this pathfinder
4.
Statement of impact of pathfinder on student learning
5.
Listing of the six (6) formats chosen, with brief rationale for why you chose each one
And Part Two, the REAL pathfinder that you have constructed for students, which will include
1.
Title (may include grade, subject, teacher, as needed)
2.
Brief introduction for students
3.
List of resources (minimum of 10), with brief annotation (hints for the students as to what can be found, phrase to 1-2 sentences)
4.
Reminder to students to cite sources
Worth 15 points
AASL/NCATE Standards Addressed:
Standard 1: Use of Information and Ideas
1.1
Efficient and Ethical Information Seeking Behavior
1.3
Access to Information
1.4
Stimulating Learning Environment
Standard 2: Teaching and Learning
2.1 Knowledge of Learners and Learning
2.2 Effective and Knowledgeable Teacher
2.3 Information Literacy Curriculum
Standard 3: Collaboration and Leadership
3.2 Instructional Partner
Standard 4:Program Administration
4.1 Managing Information Resources: Selecting, Organizing, Using
Scoring Guide
EDSL560: Informational Sources and Services
Pathfinder
REQUIRED ELEMENTS UNACCEPTABLE
(0)
A. Part One: SOL/Topic selected (2.3)
Topic selected unrelated to
ACCEPTABLE (0.5)
Topic selected related to curriculum and
TARGET (1)*
Topic selected related to curriculum and
3

Assessment #2
*B. Part One: Brief introduction setting context in which students will use pathfinder (1.1, 1.3)
*C. Part One: Description of collaboration that occurs related to pathfinder (2.1, 2.2,
2.3, 3.2)
*D. Part One: Statement of impact on student learning
(2.1, 2.2, 2.3)
*E. Part One: Listing of six
(6) formats chosen, with brief rationale for each one (1.3,
2.3, 4.1)
F. Part Two: Title (2.3)
G. Part Two: Brief introduction for students (1.4) curriculum and standards
No introduction to set context for pathfinder use
No evidence of collaboration in development or use of pathfinder
No statement of impact on student learning
Less than six (6) formats chosen and/or no rationale given
No title given
No introduction given for students standards
Introduction explains context for pathfinder use, giving basic information such as grade level and content area
Evidence of communication and joint planning with classroom teacher in development of pathfinder
Statement by LMS of impact on student learning
Six (6) formats listed, brief rationale for each one
Title including grade/subject/teacher
Brief introduction for students standards; brief rationale given for selecting this topic
Introduction explains context for pathfinder use and gives more detailed information such as grade level, content area, academic level of students, etc.
Evidence of communication, joint planning, use, and evaluation of pathfinder by teacher and LMS
Statement by LMS and classroom teacher of impact on student learning
Six (6) formats listed, solid rationale developed for each one
Title including grade/subject/teacher
More detailed introduction for students
Over ten (10) resources listed, with annotations
*H. Part Two: List of resources, with brief annotation for each (2.3, 4.1)
I. Part Two: Reminder to students to cite sources (1.1,
1.3)
Less than ten (10) resources listed and/or no annotations
No reminder to students to cite sources
Ten (10) resources listed, with annotations
Reminder to student to cite sources
Reminder to student to cite sources, plus examples of or links to proper citation format
J. Mechanics: Spelling, grammar, punctuation
Numerous spelling, grammatical, and/or punctuation errors.
*10 categories; Target =1; Acceptable=.5; Unacceptable=0; *except for B, C, D, E, and H in which Target=2, Acceptable=1, Unacceptable=0
RATING SCALE
Minimal spelling, grammatical, and punctuation errors.
No errors in spelling, grammar, or punctuation.
4

Assessment #2
1.4
2.1
2.2
2.3
3.2
4.1
Score
12-15
7.6-11.9
7.5
Grade
A
B
C
0-7.4 F
AASL/NCATE Standards Addressed:
Standard 1: Use of Information and Ideas
1.1 Efficient and Ethical Information Seeking Behavior
1.3 Access to Information
1.4
Stimulating Learning Environment
Standard 2: Teaching and Learning
2.1 Knowledge of Learners and Learning
2.2 Effective and Knowledgeable Teacher
2.3 Information Literacy Curriculum
Standard 3: Collaboration and Leadership
3.2 Instructional Partner
Standard 4: Program Administration
4.1 Managing Information Resources: Selecting, Organizing, Using
Candidate Data
Fall 2006:
Candidates N=24
Scoring Element
SOL
Introduction
Collaboration
Impact
Formats
Title
Student Introduction
Resources
Citing Sources
Mechanics
By Standard Addressed:
Standard
1.1
1.3
Unacceptable
Unacceptable
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Acceptable
1 (4%)
0
0
0
0
1 (4%)
0
0
0
0
Acceptable
0
0
0
2 (8%)
0
1 (4%)
1 (4%)
1 (4%)
Target
23 (96%)
24 (100%)
24 (100%)
24 (100%)
24 (100%)
23 (96%)
24 (100%)
24 (100%)
24 (100%)
24 (100%)
Target
24 (100%)
24 (100%)
24 (100%)
22 (92%)
24 (100%)
23 (96%)
23 (96%)
23 (96%)
5

Assessment #2
Spring 2007:
Candidates N=60
Scoring Element
SOL
Introduction
Collaboration
Impact
Formats
Title
Student Introduction
Resources
Citing Sources
Mechanics
By Standard Addressed:
Unacceptable
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Acceptable
1 (2%)
3 (5%)
5 (8%)
2 (3%)
7 (12%)
3 (5%)
1 (2%)
0
3 (5%)
2 (3%)
Standard
1.1
1.3
1.4
2.1
2.2
2.3
3.2
4.1
Unacceptable
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Acceptable
3 (5%)
1 (2%)
1 (2%)
5 (8%)
1 (2%)
0
1 (2%)
1 (2%)
Summer 2007: EDSL560 was not offered during Summer 2007.
Fall 2007:
Candidates N=17
Scoring Element
SOL
Introduction
Collaboration
Impact
Formats
Title
Unacceptable
0
0
0
0
0
Student Introduction
Resources
Citing Sources
Mechanics
By Standard Addressed:
Standard
1.1
Unacceptable
0
0
0
0
0
0
Acceptable
0
0
1 (6%)
0
1 (6%)
0
0
2 (12%)
2 (12%)
0
Acceptable
0
Target
17 (100%)
17 (100%)
16 (94%)
17 (100%)
16 (94%)
17 (100%)
17 (100%)
15 (88%)
15 (88%)
17 (100%)
Target
17 (100%)
Target
59 (98%)
57 (95%)
55 (92%)
58 (97%)
53 (88%)
57 (95%)
59 (98%)
60 (100%)
57 (95%)
58 (97%)
Target
57 (95%)
59 (98%)
59 (98%)
55 (92%)
59 (98%)
60 (100%)
59 (98%)
59 (98%)
6

1.3
1.4
2.1
2.2
0
0
0
0
2.3
3.2
4.1
Spring 2008:
Candidates N=30
Scoring Element
0
0
0
SOL
Introduction
Collaboration
Impact
Formats
Title
Student Introduction
Resources
Citing Sources
Mechanics
By Standard Addressed:
Standard
1.1
1.3
1.4
2.1
2.2
2.3
3.2
4.1
Summer 2008:
Candidates N=26
Scoring Element
SOL
Introduction
Collaboration
Impact
Formats
Title
Student Introduction
Resources
Citing Sources
Unacceptable
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Unacceptable
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Unacceptable
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1 (6%)
0
1 (6%)
0
1 (6%)
Acceptable
0
0
0
0
0
0
1 (3%)
1
1
2 (7%)
Acceptable
0
0
1 (3%)
1 (3%)
0
1 (3%)
0
1 (3%)
Acceptable
1 (4%)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Assessment #2
17 (100%)
17 (100%)
16 (94%)
17 (100%)
16 (94%)
17 (100%)
16 (94%)
Target
30 (100%)
30 (100%)
30 (100%)
30 (100%)
30 (100%)
30 (100%)
29 (97%)
30 (100%)
30 (100%)
28 (93%)
Target
30 (100%)
30 (100%)
29 (97%)
29 (97%)
30 (100%)
29 (97%)
30 (100%)
29 (97%)
Target
25 (96%)
26 (100%)
26 (100%)
26 (100%)
26 (100%
26 (100%)
26 (100%)
26 (100%)
26 (100%)
7

1.4
2.1
2.2
2.3
3.2
4.1
Mechanics
By Standard Addressed:
Standard
1.1
1.3
0
Unacceptable
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1 (4%)
Acceptable
0
0
0
1 (4%)
0
0
1 (4%)
1 (4%)
Fall 2008: EDSL560 was not offered during Fall 2008.
Spring 2009:
Candidates N=26
Scoring Element
SOL
Introduction
Collaboration
Unacceptable
0
0
Acceptable
2 (8%)
1 (4%)
Impact
Formats
Title
Student Introduction
0
0
0
0
1 (4%)
1 (4%)
1 (4%)
0
Resources
Citing Sources
Mechanics
By Standard Addressed:
0
0
0
0
0
1 (4%)
2 (8%)
0
Standard
1.1
1.3
1.4
2.1
2.2
2.3
3.2
4.1
Unacceptable
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Acceptable
1 (4%)
0
0
4 (15%)
0
1 (4%)
2 (8%)
1 (4%)
Summer 2009: EDSL560 was not offered during Summer 2009.
Fall 2009:
Candidates N=11
Scoring Element Unacceptable Acceptable
Target
24 (92%)
25 (96%)
25 (96%)
25 (96%)
25 (96%)
26 (100%)
26 (100%)
25 (96%)
24 (92%)
26 (100%)
Target
25 (96%)
26 (100%)
26 (100%)
22 (85%)
26 (100%)
25 (96%)
24 (92%)
25 (96%)
Assessment #2
25 (96%)
Target
26 (100%)
26 (100%)
26 (100%)
25 (96%)
26 (100%)
26 (100%)
25 (96%)
25 (96%)
Target
8

1.4
2.1
2.2
2.3
3.2
4.1
SOL
Introduction
Collaboration
Impact
0
0
0
0
Formats
Title
Student Introduction
Resources
0
0
0
Citing Sources
Mechanics
By Standard Addressed:
Standard
1.1
1.3
0
0
0
Unacceptable
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1 (9%)
6 (55%)
1 (9%)
0
0
3 (27%)
0
0
1 (9%)
0
Acceptable
6 (55%)
1 (9%)
0
2 (18%)
0
1 (9%)
1 (9%)
1 (9%)
Assessment #2
10 (91%)
5 (45%)
10 (91%)
11 (100%)
11 (100%)
8 (73%)
11 (100%)
11 (100%)
10 (91%)
11 (100%)
Target
5 (45%)
10 (91%)
11 (100%)
9 (82%)
11(100%)
10 (91%)
10 (91%)
10 (91%)
9