Evaluation of academic librarians' instructional performance: Report of a national survey

Ragains, Patrick

doi:10.1016/s0734-3310(97)90036-7

Cited by 22 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The American Library Association's manual (Shonrock, 1996) for evaluating library instruction is heavily weighted towards formative evaluation; twelve of the fourteen sections that present model questions for evaluation instruments are devoted to issues related to instructional programs rather than learning outcomes. Perhaps Ragains' (1997) report on the results of a national survey of evaluation practices should come as no surprise; nearly 75% of respondents report the use of "reaction data" (satisfaction surveys), while less than half that report testing student knowledge. This reliance primarily on reaction or attitudinal data has been criticized for failing to measure what students actually learn (Colborn & Cordell, 1999): "At most, it provides information about how the student perceives the librarian's presentation and how he or she feels about the library and/or librarian" (p. 125).…”

Section: Assessment Of Library Instructionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Library Instruction Assessment in Academic Libraries

Tancheva

Andrews

Steinhart

2007

Public Services Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Determining the best methods of assessment for a library instruction program in a large research university can be a challenging task. Albert R. Mann Library at Cornell University Library has pilot tested three methods of formative and summative assessment for its library instruction programattitudinal, outcomes-based, and gap-measure-and determined not only key areas of improvement for the program, but also the benefits and drawbacks of each method of assessment. Attitudinal assessment has guided program improvement in areas of marketing and user satisfaction but does not provide the measurement of learning that outcomes-based assessment covers. The latter can be difficult to achieve in single-session, short-term instruction, while gap-measure assessment can provide a more nuanced view of both patron and instructor attitudes toward learning outcomes, if not actual data on achievement on the objectives themselves. The authors have determined that a combination of these three different types of assessment can address the shortcomings of a single method alone and provide a better measure of the program as a whole.Keywords: information literacy, assessment, evaluation, college and university libraries Assessment of library instruction is a growing topic of concern for library instructors as evidenced by the 246 articles found in Library Literature on evaluation of bibliographic instruction (more in the last two years than in the previous six combined). A number of assessment models are available for library instruction; however, with the wide range of methods and their varying utility depending on the format and type of instruction being assessed, choosing and implementing models can be difficult. It is our contention that to present a well-rounded picture of an instruction program, more than one method of assessment is necessary. Over the last two years, the staff at Albert R. Mann Library at Cornell University Library (CUL) has pilot-tested a three-pronged approach to assessment. The first assessment was an evaluation of the entire CUL instruction program using focus groups and a Web-based statistical survey; the second outcomes-based assessment, focused on a single courserelated instruction session at Mann Library, consisted of a pre-test survey and examination of the results of a post-instruction tutorial assignment; and a third assessment featured a gap-measure analysis of instructors' and students' perceptions of the importance of the learning objectives in Mann Library's open workshop series. Below we present our findings and their effect on our instruction program, address the benefits and limitations of these various types of assessment, and show that a multi-method model of assessment, both formative and summative, is key to a clear picture of the various aspects of our instruction program.

show abstract

Section: Assessment Of Library Instructionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Library Instruction Assessment in Academic Libraries

Tancheva

Andrews

Steinhart

2007

Public Services Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, the large body of works on library instruction has only a small subset that focuses on evaluation. Studies measuring how much learning has occurred in the one-time session, or how it has transformed the learner, are not easily found in the literature because -the evaluation of library instruction tends to focus upon attendees' perceptions of the librarian's performance.‖ 19 As such, librarians rarely have a way of knowing how much students have learned. The situation is even more difficult for assessing instruction to LEP students; there is hardly any material in the literature that deals with assessing the output of LEP students.…”

Section: Output/learning Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Connecting the dots: Limited English proficiency, second language learning theories, and information literacy instruction

Conteh-Morgan¹

2002

The Journal of Academic Librarianship

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Librarians who teach students with limited English proficiency have discussed various barriers limiting effective learning. This article shows how applying second language acquisition theories and teaching practices derived from them can significantly impact outcomes of information literacy instruction.In the professional literature and electronic discussion groups, such as BI-L, the library experience of limited English proficient (LEP) 1 students is a regularly discussed topic. With regard to instruction, the most attention has been paid to the various barriers that affect their use of the library and, more recently, to culture-dependent learning styles. This is because, according to Diane DiMartino and Lucinda Zoe, 2 many librarians agree that:Language, cultural and technological barriers, and a heightened awareness of learning styles and cognitive development theories are . . . primary issues that need increased attention. Of particular interest to [them] is the need to gain greater awareness and understanding of learning styles and the integration of that knowledge into instruction planning. 3Language is the most cited barrier. 4 But perhaps rather than see it as such, it would be more helpful to understand the language issue from another perspective that could offer librarians fresh insights on instruction.Library instruction is known for having incorporated behavioral and cognitive theories of learning. There are other learning theories, however, that library instruction has not paid closer attention to that have a more direct impact on teaching LEP students-theories of second language acquisition and teaching. Indeed, it has been recognized that all teachers of a languageminority population who want to be linguistically and culturally responsive in their teaching must know not only about cross-cultural communication, but about first and second language learning and development, ways of adapting materials and methods, and assessment.5 Despite the many examples of librarian-ESL faculty collaboration found in the literature, only a few have discussed or called for the application of ESL theories to library instruction. 6 Awareness of theories of second language learning and approaches to teaching is vital if librarians are to provide more meaningful instruction to LEP students.This article summarizes two major language acquisition theories and ESL teaching methods derived from them, and discusses a library instruction model based on them. This model has been used to teach advanced students in the ESL program at Ohio State University.

show abstract

“…Previous surveys of the literature have found minimal evidence that evaluation in library instruction programs includes meaningful assessment of student learning (Ragains, 1997;Colborn, 1998;Warner, 2003). In his survey of 44 academic library instruction coordinators, Ragains (1997) concluded that their most frequently gathered assessment data is "reaction data" such as student or faculty satisfaction surveys.…”

Section: Assessment: Why Is It So Elusive?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Complex Questions, Evolving Answers

McMillen

Deitering

2007

Public Services Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since 2001, librarians at Oregon State University's Valley Library have been working to build a "teaching library" supported by a clearly articulated instruction program. From the start, we believed that we needed to assess the teaching library's impact, not only to determine the success or failure of our efforts but also to demonstrate the need for intentional, proactive information literacy instruction on our campus. No single assessment tool or method proved adequate to effectively measure student learning happening both inside and outside the library. We describe our evolving, multi-pronged approach to measuring the impact of the library on student learning in the context of current assessment practices in academic libraries and higher education.

show abstract

Evaluation of academic librarians' instructional performance: Report of a national survey

Cited by 22 publications

References 5 publications

Library Instruction Assessment in Academic Libraries

Library Instruction Assessment in Academic Libraries

Connecting the dots: Limited English proficiency, second language learning theories, and information literacy instruction

Complex Questions, Evolving Answers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About