Library / Blackboard Integration

Children: Support Info, Google Credentials, Rough Ideas from Fall 2023 toward design, GIS/Mapping Resources, Restorative justice group agreement, Communications group agreement, Accountability group agreement, Begin Here Requests, Before We Begin Requests, vestigial: ignore

Library / Blackboard Integration’s Docs ▸ Notes for Assessment Meeting

Action items: Pilot participants & librarians should share assessment tools. We can use the forum in Academic Commons and the group “files” area to upload, share, and discuss assessment tools and strategies for adaptation.

Base line stats & Quantitative stats

List of hybrid / online course offerings (CUNY 1st)

Blackboard usage stats: available vs. unavailable, unique logins (more analytics possible with separate package currently being pursued by CUNY Central)

Blackboard Content (statistical tracking for use–unique & total clicks–possible for all content). Includes content added to courses and Blackboard content outside of courses including Library Content Area.

Libguide–Springshare native stats can capture referral URL

Google Analytics can track referral URLs for:

  • EZproxy logins coming from Blackboard (to get a sense of general use of linked licensed resources by faculty in Blackboard)
  •  Libguides
  • Library website
  • OneSearch
  • Guide on the Side

Notes about building blocks: Possible to propose building blocks for some of these resources (alternative to modules) if available from vendors. Building blocks are cleared for single sign on (wont resolve EZproxy issues though).

Notes about UTM code: Library should investigate /  could potentially use URL extensions to parse out usage data for embedded resources.

Qualitative Assessments 

Notes: primarily discussed assessments relating to assignment design & assignment outcomes.  Content to enhance information literacy and improve assignment design. Discussed how qualitative / quantitative data can be used to get faculty buy-in or make faculty more receptive to library intervention.

  • pre / post tests for students
  • iterative assessments at point of library intervention in a course
  • Guide On The Side built in assessments & analytics
  • Educanon–video tool w/ built in assessments & analytics
  • Students reflections (qualitative–> quantitative: Text Mining)
  • Assignment or citation analysis
  • Faculty Surveys

Notes adapting other assessment tools:

  • UX tests–since these reveal a lot about student information seeking behaviors UX tests can be adapted to measure efficacy of library interventions in online ed spaces.
  • One shot assessment tools may be applicable in BB environment. BB assessments can inversely help shape traditional assessments of face to face library interventions.

Things worth testing (not comprehensive but these came up in conversation)

  • student obstacles to resource
  • citations (faculty interest in this as a possible learning outcome)
  • student capacity to evaluate resources
  • learning outcomes related to IL–must come out of close discussion with faculty

Workload concerns / ideas

  • Micro level embeddment is time consuming
  • Lack of inst. / dept. buy in can exacerbate workload issues
  • Importance of balancing generic vs. customized library interventions and establishing expectations with faculty
  • Possibility of using virtual embeddment to supplement face-to-face instruction to relieve existing workload issues