Notes from the LACUNY Instruction Committee Discussion of IL Assessment on 11/14/2017:

Attendees: Galina Letnikova (LaG), Barbara Gray (SOJ), Stephanie Margolin (Hunter), Susan Wengler (QCC), Quintis Pinder (QCC), Emma Antobam-Ntekudzi (BCC), Silvia Lin Hanick (LaG), John Pell (Hunter), Anne Leonard (CityTech), Alexandra Hamlett and Megan Lacy (Guttman), Daisy Dominguez (CCNY)

Discussion about readings:

1:Bracke article:

Two themes identified: Need for programmatic assessment to show impact, and need for assessment of teaching for professional development purposes.

• Major value of focus group in the article was to help librarians realize that they were not formally considering assessment, even though they may have been already doing it.
• Should we talk about models of engagement, like in quiry-based instead of models of assessment?

2: Lacy and Chen article:

Lacy shared research log and other tools of assessment from Guttman’s IL Toolkit, and discussed evolution of assessment methods since the article.

She recommended:

• Guttman’s Info Literacy Faculty Toolkit
• Megan Oakleaf’s Assessment Workbook
• Assessment Methods discussed by group:
• Reflectively journaling after every class
• For a One-Shot, leave Post-It notes on terminals, and asked students upon leaving to write: “what one thing didn’t you understand?” After class answer top 5 questions, and send to professor to share with students.

3: Wang article:

Discussion:

• Ask what questions students want answered, shape instruction around questions
• Less instruction, more students working out problems on tools
• Getting faculty to buy into new instruction methods

 

Notes from the LACUNY Instruction Committee Discussion of IL Assessment on 11/14/2017:

Attendees: Galina Letnikova (LaG), Barbara Gray (SOJ), Stephanie Margolin (Hunter), Susan Wengler (QCC), Quintis Pinder (QCC), Emma Antobam-Ntekudzi (BCC), Silvia Lin Hanick (LaG), John Pell (Hunter), Anne Leonard (CityTech), Alexandra Hamlett and Megan Lacy (Guttman), Daisy Dominguez (CCNY)

Discussion about readings:

1:Bracke article:

Two themes identified: Need for programmatic assessment to show impact, and need for assessment of teaching for professional development purposes.

• Major value of focus group in the article was to help librarians realize that they were not formally considering assessment, even though they may have been already doing it.
• Should we talk about models of engagement, like in quiry-based instead of models of assessment?

2: Lacy and Chen article:

Lacy shared research log and other tools of assessment from Guttman’s IL Toolkit, and discussed evolution of assessment methods since the article.

She recommended:

• Guttman’s Info Literacy Faculty Toolkit
• Megan Oakleaf’s Assessment Workbook
• Assessment Methods discussed by group:
• Reflectively journaling after every class
• For a One-Shot, leave Post-It notes on terminals, and asked students upon leaving to write: “what one thing didn’t you understand?” After class answer top 5 questions, and send to professor to share with students.

3: Wang article:

Discussion:

• Ask what questions students want answered, shape instruction around questions
• Less instruction, more students working out problems on tools
• Getting faculty to buy into new instruction methods