Nancy Weiner
William Paterson University
MaryBeth Meszaros
Monmouth University
VALE Users’ Conference January 5, 2011
First Year Seminar @ WPUNJ
• A 1.5 credit course required for graduation
• Acclimates students to William Paterson
University's campus
• Educates students in the areas of critical
thinking, academic integrity, study skills
strategies, information technology and other
topics that will provide a foundation for
student success
Connecting with FYS
• Office of First Year Experience holds
training sessions for FYS faculty
• Cheng librarians invited to present at
training sessions for nearly a decade
• Opportunity to introduce new FYS faculty
to the importance of library instruction
• Established a relationship with Director of
First Year Experience
FYS and Library Instruction
• Library instruction session is not mandatory
• Nearly 90% of the sections do schedule a library
session
• Instructing in a vacuum since most classes do
not have research assignments
• Common Reader Selection Committee
• Common Reader first used in 2005
• Use of Common Reader provides content to
develop the library in-class assignment
FYS and Library Instruction
• Provide students with an overview of
available Library resources and services
• Focus on the various format types and
potential sources of information
• Introduce students to basic elements of the
research process
• Provide students with opportunity to use the
Library web page to access article databases
and the online catalog
Common Readers and FYS
• Assigned to students to read during the summer
• Discussion of common reader varies from class to
class
• Library benefits since it provides content for us to
work with in devising assignments
• Covers the basics of searching
– Library catalog
– Academic Search Premier Database
• Web site Evaluation
• Citation preparation/identification
The Pact
• Fall 2005
• Instruction provided for 62 sections
(88% of total number of FYS classes)
• Random sample of assignments graded (n=334)
using a scoring rubric
• Average score 11.8 out of 15
• Assignments developed around themes:
– Peer pressure
– Friendship
– Self Esteem
What we learned…..
• Not enough time to cover everything
• Focus on basic Information Literacy skills
• Spend more time on website evaluation
• Eliminate the bibliography part
• Results of assignments are reported at FYS
faculty training each year
• Identify student competencies and deficiencies
The Pact
• Fall 2006
• Assignment revised based upon results of previous
year
• Instruction provided for 56 sections
(89% of total FYS classes)
• Graded assignments used by instructors in 22
sections
• Convenience sample (n=345)
– Comparing completed assignments
– Those used by faculty had higher scores
• Average score 10.54 out of 12
• Only used three themes
The Kite Runner
• The Kite Runner selected in spring 2007 for
use in fall
• Topics related to selected book identified in
spring/early summer
– Women in Afghanistan
– Kites
• Assignment revised and included citations to
sources relevant to the topic
• Convenience sample (n=284)
• Average score 12.65 (15)
Freakonomics
• What do teachers & sumo wrestlers have in
common?
• How is the KKK like a group of real estate
agents?• Why do drug dealers still live with their
moms?
• What makes a perfect parent?
Freakonomics
• Fall 2008
–
–
–
–
A random sample (n=265) of the collected assignments were graded
The average score was 10 using a 15 point scoring rubric
Students had difficulty completing the assignment
Students demonstrated competency in using the catalog and a
database
– Assignment revised to incorporate more questions on web site
evaluation criteria
• Fall 2009
– A convenience sample (n=472) of the collected assignments were
graded.
– The average score was 11 and a 15 point scoring rubric was used.
– The assignment included evaluation of a Wikipedia page and was
the first question on the assignment
– Students still had difficulty completing the assignment and
revisions were made to reduce the number of questions
Common Reader Library Assignment
• Library assignment shared with FYS faculty
at training
• Supporting material also provided along
with suggestions for follow up assignments
• Training for librarians held prior to start of
the fall semester
• Librarian cheat sheet provided
• Rubric also revised to reflect any changes
Common Readers and FYS
Advantages
Disadvantages
•Provides content to develop
questions for in class library
assignment
• Not all FYS faculty
incorporate/discuss the
contents of the common reader
•Provides a common topic to
engage students with during
library session
• Not all students read the
common reader
•Grading the assignments allows
for tracking of information
literacy skills
•Data used to revise assignment
•Involved with selection process
and FYS Faculty training
• Students do not take FYS
course seriously and assume
they know it all during the
library session
• Annual revision to assignment
is time consuming
• Difficult to identify library
resources related to selected
book
First-year Seminar Program,
Monmouth University,
launched Fall 2010
Stage One: Attended several FY Faculty Seminar Workshops (AY 08-09)
Stage Two: Presented for FY Faculty Seminar Workshop (Aug. 2009)
Stage Three: Developed Ongoing Communication with FY
Seminar Program Directors—demonstrated knowledge of pedagogy & learning theory was crucial in establishing credibility
Stage Four: Accessed (download) course syllabi; requested all remaining
approved course syllabi
OUTREACH :
STAGES 1 & 2: AY 08-09
Information Literacy, Epistemological Beliefs,
and the First-year Student Researcher: How
Librarians Can Help
Dr. M. Beth Meszaros
First-year Seminar Workshop
August 2009
What Librarians Can Do
•
•
•
•
•
Librarians are experts at teaching search strategies for effective retrieval;
we offer instructional sessions designed to help your students get started
and we encourage subsequent follow-up supervised research sessions for
students; we can also offer on-on-one assistance by appointment and we
are now on-site in the Campus Writing Center.
But librarians are not just about searching; ACRL standards have broadened
the librarian’s support role; we are just as concerned as you are that
students evaluate information and use it effectively and ethically; good
thinking and good writing matters to us too!
We can help you incorporate IL Objectives into your assignments and
suggest doable grading rubrics
We can ensure that resources are available for students
We understand that knowledge construction is discipline-inflected. We can
guide you to ACRL IL standards that have been developed specifically for
your subject matter.
•
•
•
•
•
What Instructional Faculty Can
Do
Bring your classes to the library for (an) instructional session(s)
and/or for supervised research.
Seek how-to advice for weaving IL outcomes and objectives into
your course assignments and/or for designing a grading criteria
rubric. You need not cover every outcome. Start small.
Since First-year students have not had time to acquire a disciplinary
vocabulary, try to provide lots of support and scaffolding if you
assign peer-reviewed literature. Multi-subject databases and quality
journalism are often better choices for freshman research.
Don’t assume good gross reading comprehension. Model active
reading strategies (or ask us for help) and frequently test student
comprehension. Ask students to summarize what they read.
Check with us first to ensure that we have on hand the resources
your students will need; ensure that your assignment is practical and
doable by carrying it out yourself.
What Instructional Faculty Can Do
• Encourage metacognition by asking students to keep research
journals or logs. These need not be onerous to grade, and they
provide a wealth of information about how students are conducting
their research
• If practicable, require submission of an annotated bibliography, one
that requires students to weigh evidence and evaluate knowledge
claims
• Tell us what we can do to serve you and your students better!
FY Seminar Course Objectives (assessable learning outcomes – “students will
be able to…”): 3-credit course. transition + academic content
1. *Students will demonstrate critical thinking as they actively
engage in course material.
2. *Students will be able to seek out, evaluate and
integrate information from multiple sources based on a
course topic.
3.
Students will demonstrate awareness of ethical debates pertaining to the
course topic.
4. *Students will demonstrate awareness of ethical
considerations of academic life.
5. *Students will articulate and evaluate their experience
with college resources (such as but not necessarily limited
to one academic and one non academic resource).
6.
7.
Students will demonstrate strategies for improving academic skills (such as
but not necessarily limited to time management, stress management, and
study skills).
Students will demonstrate an understanding of academic culture and its
norms, values, and practices, including the differences between college
and high school intellectual activity and work.
52 syllabi analyzed for activities, assignments and
outcomes that pertain to Information Literacy, broadly
construed (May-June 2010) See handout for list of course syllabi
approved.
STAGE 4: ANALYSIS OF COURSE
SYLLABI
Lists…
• Instructors requesting tour and/or library
instructional session (+ tentative dates)
• Instructors expressing particular concerns
about plagiarism
• Instructors assigning metacognitive activities,
e.g. research narrative
• Instructors mandating use of at least some
library resources
More Lists
• Instructors requiring students to work
with Writing Center tutor (have draft
read)
• Instructors providing guidance regarding
use of web sites
• Instructors specifying number of sources
• Instructors forbidding use of nonacademic sources
• Instructors requiring summary and/or
comparison of popular vs academic
sources
Customized email to each instructor.
Letters specifically addressed each course syllabus in terms of library
support offered. Syllabus quoted in email. Released June 2010.
Follow-up reminder email August 16, 2010. (Not customized.)
OUTREACH, STAGE 2
Number of
FY Seminar
Sessions
offered Fall
2010
45
Bookings Fall 2010
Number of
One-shot
Sessions
Booked &
Delivered
36 (80%)
Number of
Supervised
Research
Sessions
Booked
5
Number of
Tours
2
Assignment-specific LibGuides
• Evil and Human Cruelty
required 2 research assignments, one focused on course content, the other
focused on the “transition element”—common problems encountered by
first-year students
• Tea Appreciation
required the student to seek out, evaluate, and integrate findings from
scholarly sources (i.e., peer-reviewed journal articles) in order to
characterize the influence of tea on a particular health outcome; student
also required to discuss draft with writing center tutor
End-of-semester Faculty
“Debriefing”
• “I overestimated their reading level”
• “We have too many learning objectives”
• “They don’t seem to know what is going on in the world”; “I
overestimated their knowledge of American cultural history”
• “Some students didn’t think this would be a challenging
course—they had to be prodded”
• “Many aren’t doing the readings”
Feedback from One Instructor
• “Lots of variation in the extent to which the students engaged in critical
thinking…”
• “For many …being asked to draw upon several sources to answer a
focused question was an entirely new experience. Some did not
understand the connection…”
• “At first, some reacted as if I had invaded their privacy by setting deadlines
and insisting on having approval of their focused questions in advance. “
• “…students used the Web page created for us. …verbal feedback
suggested that they found it helpful and immensely convenient (they also
gave high marks to the targeted lesson in the library).”
Advantages/Disadvantages of Themed, Disciplinespecific vs. Common Reader Approach
advantages
disadvantages
• High buy-in from students—they
can choose what interests them
• High buy-in from faculty—they
get to teach their “passion”
• High buy-in from librarians—no
burn-out due to repetitious oneshot delivery; deeper
engagement of faculty & students
resulted in more engaging class
sessions
•
•
•
•
Some students may pay insufficient
attention to course descriptions… “I
didn’t get any history majors…”
The transition elements were
sometimes seen as vying with course
content
No common academic content—no
opportunity to assess information
literacy component; left to discretion
of course instructor; no access to
student papers
More labor and time-intensive for
librarians
Going forward…..
How to move from tools-based one-shots
• to deeper involvement with assignment design and
assessment rubrics in terms of fostering critical
thinking/information literacy objectives?
• to a more collaborative model of faculty/librarian interaction?
• to addressing faculty concerns such as student reading
comprehension issues and faculty “overload” in terms of
multiple learning outcomes?
One thing at a time! Slow and steady
wins the race….
• Provide faculty workshop addressing assignment design
(“piggybacking” information literacy outcomes with other
learning outcomes) utilizing successful faculty-produced
examples
• Provide follow-up faculty workshop to help foster active
reading in students (directed reading activities)—train the
trainer
• Sensitize program directors to benefits of multi-sessions (as
opposed to one-shots) and true partnership