LSTA 2010/2011 Grant Activities Summary
The Pre-college Information Literacy Research (PILR) project continued and was the central
focus of the grant this year. PILR teams at select SBCTC colleges engage in a research
process to answer the question “How does/Does information literacy contribute to overall
learning and transition for pre-college students?” Each research team consists of one librarian
and one to three pre-college instructors. Over the course of four quarters (one planning quarter
followed by three implementation quarters), teams design task-oriented, integrative
assignments, use a standardized rubric to assess student learning, and collect and report data
to document student achievement of IL outcomes. Faculty and students involved will also fill out
surveys. Data will be used to explore the impact of IL instruction on achievement and transition
for pre-college students.
By the end of the 2010/2011 academic year, PILR included 39 research teams in five research
groups. The first two PILR groups, A and B, completed research this year with final
implementation quarters in winter and spring, respectively. In order to collect more data, Group
A was offered an optional fourth implementation quarter in spring. Group C implemented their
instruction plans in winter and spring, and Group D began implementation in spring. Group E
began research with the planning quarter in spring. Groups C, D, and E will continue collecting
data through the 2011/2012 academic year; data collection for PILR will be completed by spring,
2012.
In total, PILR includes 15 colleges, 26 librarians and 42 pre-college instructors are involved. See
Appendix A for a list of colleges courses included in PILR project.
Based on a review of each team’s Instruction Plan Report, the following trends can be seen:
PILR trends:
● The four-quarter process enabled teams to continually revise outcomes and instruction
to better meet outlined project goals and, more importantly, improve student learning.
○ "By repeating the project a second time, we were able to apply what we've
learned and improve the lesson and assignment" (Highline Community College).
○ “We think that this quarter’s assignment/instruction plan were much more fluid
and well thought out than those in previous quarters of our project...We also think
that we nailed the scope of the assignment so that it was challenging but not
overwhelming for students” (Pierce College).
●
Students performed real-world, meaningful tasks to gain transferable knowledge and
skills. One librarian wrote, "The feedback I get from the students indicates that they feel
better prepared to find information for everyday living..." (Wenatchee Valley College).
Students were asked to demonstrate the ability to
○ evaluate health information (Skagit Valley College).
○
○
○
○
○
○
○
find and evaluate career information (Skagit Valley College, Pierce College,
Clover Park Technical College, Wentachee Valley Community College, and
others).
write a resume (South Seattle Community College).
research possible college majors (Pierce College).
evaluate immigration web sites (Lower Columbia College).
find information about a government entity (Lower Columbia College).
research alternative modes of transportation (Lower Columbia College).
find and evaluate information about creating a small business (Pierce College).
One PILR pre-college instructor summarized by saying, "I found [students] printing
recipes and taking down personal information [from the database] beyond the
assignment...This is an amazing accomplishment for my students...They were able to
benefit from the foundation level of the library and the database search and add a life
skill of using the library for...other life purposes" (Whatcom Community College).
●
Students were introduced to information literacy skills critical for college success.
Intended outcomes such as citing sources with MLA or APA, summarizing found
information, using the college library’s tools and sources, becoming familiar with the
library, and being comfortable asking a librarian for help all impart needed skills. PILR
gave pre-college students a chance to practice these kinds of skills and feel comfortable
being part of the college and using college resources they might otherwise have not.
○ "After some discussion about typical READ 088 students, we realized that most
had visited the library very little, if at all" (Walla Walla Community College).
○ “An additional result of this collaboration includes academic benefits beyond the
skills developed. By the investment of the librarian in their learning process,
students saw proof that they - like their college counterparts - could reach
expectations of academic competence that deserved the attention of academic
staff outside the confines of the ABE department” (Lower Columbia College).
○ "Students were excited to be part of the college and felt that they were learning
valuable information that they could use later in other classes and other areas"
(Whatcom Community College).
○ "If we didn't have [these students] in the library for this opportunity I don't know
that they would ever come here on their own...The faculty really enjoy bringing
the students here and I believe they will continue to do this orientation even after
the grant is over" (Lake Washington Technical College).
●
Unique characteristics of pre-college students and courses made consistently carrying
out instruction “as planned” a challenge.
○ “An ongoing concern with the project has been that many students stay in the
same level ESL course for 2-3 quarters. Because of this, we have had to change
the PILR assignment each quarter so that students do not receive the same
assignment two consecutive quarters. This has posed somewhat of a challenge
in instructional design” (Pierce College). Similarly, at Lake Washington Technical
○
○
○
●
College, "We had to change up completely since this quarter had many of the
same students as last quarter."
"Because this is a small campus, [each class has] a wide diversity of English
ability. It is difficult to involve the more advanced students when you also have
beginning ESL" (Skagit Valley College).
"The most common problem with teaching ABE students is that they do not have
to attend class every day and they do not get a grade for the class" (Wenatchee
Valley College).
"There is a lot of attrition in the class and it's reflected in the number of papers
we got. [The pre-college instructor] said this is pretty typical for this ABE level"
(Green River Community College).
Planned outcomes needed to be scaled back throughout implementation quarters. Often
students simply needed more time to be able to learn and demonstrate a certain skill or
skill set; by and large instruction plan reports that indicate teams worked together for
multiple class periods indicate greater student success with assignments.
Sometimes, though, outcomes or instruction needed to be adjusted to account for
students’ developmental level:
○ "[We] need to improve...the worksheet with simpler language" (Whatcom
Community College).
○ "The librarian consultation form worked well to get students and librarians talking,
but may need to be simplified for this level" (Highline Community College).
○ “This quarter...we wanted to continue covering similar material and using a
similar format for the collaboration, but knew we needed to acknowledge a lower
skill level and language level in our students” (South Seattle Community
College).
○ "Even after additional instruction, selecting appropriate search terms continues to
be a challenge for students at this level" (Highline Community College).
Often developmental challenges with this student population involved technology:
○ "[The librarian] didn't realize that some seemingly simple tasks such as copying
and pasting in Word, saving documents, etc. would require instruction" (Green
River Community College).
○ “[The intended outcomes] assumed that students were a little more comfortable
with computers, which it turns out they are not” (Lake Washington Technical
College).
○ "...will provide additional information and practice in setting up student
accounts..." (Whatcom Community College).
○ Lower Columbia College added “know how to log on, how to click” to the list of
things their students needed to be able to do.
●
It is difficult to create one rubric that can scale to this many different classes and levels.
The rubric for the PILR project was difficult to create, and instruction plans from the
research teams indicate that it is sometimes difficult to use as well. Group A seemed to
have the most trouble with the rubric, which makes sense given that they are the only
group to have begun planning and implementation before the official rubric was
published. Other groups seemed to have less trouble, though some expressed
challenges in trying to match their outcomes to the rubric:
○ "It was challenging to align the PILR rubric with the assignments the students
submitted" (Highline Community College).
○ “The rubric (especially #4, 5) may not have been appropriate for ESL, due to their
lack of depth of information literacy knowledge. More time would be needed to
reach those levels” (Skagit Valley College).
One group at Highline Community College even gave thoughtful and constructive
feedback on specific ways the rubric could be improved.
The rubric was used as a successful learning tool in several cases.
○ After sharing the rubric with our students, “[the instructor] asked them to answer
three questions about information literacy and they did a great job” (Green River
Community College).
●
Overwhelmingly, comments about students and student learning were positive:
○ “Students got excited about what they were doing” (Lower Columbia College).
○ "Students seemed to appreciate the relevance of the assignment to their own
lives" (Pierce College).
○ "Students found the material important and useful for their career goals" (South
Seattle Community College).
○ "Students seemed to feel proud and happy that they were able to find books on
their own..." (South Seattle Community College).
○ "Students find the project valuable for their career choices. Some changed
programs after the project" (Clover Park Technical College).
○ "Students asked to go back to the database to get more detail. This is an
amazing accomplishment for my students. To have my students be interested in
a project and care enough to add to it is a great success" (Whatcom Community
College).
○ "When polled, most [students] said that they would return [to the library] and now
felt more comfortable knowing how to effectively research..." (Whatcom
Community College).
○ "The key to the success was students helping each other...they feel very positive
about their presentations" (Columbia Basin College).
○ "Students were excited to present to the class what they learned" (Bellingham
Technical College).
Rising Junior
Another portion of the LSTA grant funding in the 2010/2011 academic year went to Rising
Junior initiatives. Mini grants ranging from $1800 to $2850 were awarded to “foster collaboration
between library faculty and discipline faculty to promote information literacy that prepares ‘rising
juniors’ for success at 4-year institutions.”
(http://informationliteracywactc.pbworks.com/w/page/32766620/Rising-Junior-Initiatives)
Participating schools were Bellingham Technical College, Green River Community College,
Lower Columbia College, North Seattle Community College, Pierce College, Seattle Central
Community College, Shoreline Community College, Skagit Valley College, Spokane Community
College, Spokane Falls Community College, Wenatchee Valley College, and Whatcom
Community College.
The grant period was short so many schools used the grant to start a larger or longer-term
project that will continue beyond Spring, 2011.
Mini grant projects varied widely from library to library. Grants could be roughly categorized as
follows:
● Information Literacy instruction and outcome sequencing: librarians and faculty took time
to design developmentally appropriate assignments and/or outcomes through a
sequence of transfer courses (NSCC, Bellingham, GRCC, Spokane Falls, Pierce)
● College Success: librarians and discipline faculty focused on projects to help students
navigate college resources (SCCC, Pierce)
● Information literacy and eLearning/online instruction: librarians built IL instruction into
Angel, adapted HTML instruction tools for Angel, created Tegrity recordings of
instruction sessions, and created online libguides (GRCC, Shoreline, Whatcom,
Wenatchee, Lower Columbia)
● WASSAIL: librarians tested WASSAIL as a tool to manage IL assessment data
(Spokane, Shoreline)
Appendix A
PILR participating colleges:
Bellevue College, Bellingham Technical College, Clover Park Technical College, Columbia
Basin College, Green River Community College, Highline Community College, Lake
Washington Technical College, Lower Columbia College, Pierce College, Seattle Central
Community College, Skagit Valley College, South Seattle Community College, Walla Walla
Community College, Wenatchee Valley College, Whatcom Community College.
PILR courses:
● ABE: levels 4, 5-6, 031, 041, 045, 049, 050, 051, 052, 053, 054, 056-058, 060, 061, 063,
090
●
ESL: levels 1-2, 1-3, 3, 3a&3b, 3b&4a, 3-4, 5-6, 4-6, 6, 054/064
●
GED: Writing, GED 1-2, GED Math 5-6
●
Developmental Education: Humanities & ENGL 065, Pre-college ENGL + Speech 110,
ENG 094, Reading 075, Reading 078, Reading 088, Math 071, Math 122, Math 112 +
ENGL 082, ENGL 100/ENGL 083, ENGL 100