Swiss Army Assessment

1. Swiss Army Assessment Assorted Tools for Evaluating Instruction Diana Hartle, Amy Watts University of Georgia

2. Measure twice, cut once • Who or what is being assessed? • Why is the assessment happening? • What do you hope to do with your findings? • Also remember (as if you could forget) your budget, time, and technology constraints.

3. Paper or Plastic? How are you going to do your assessment? • Methodology – quantitative or qualitative? • What’s your yardstick? • Collection – Paper? Computerized? Other technology?

4. For every job, there is a perfect tool Don’t reinvent the wheel • Do a literature search in library literature. • Web search for other libraries’ initiatives • Trawl the listservs – if you’ve already searched the archives and nothing’s there, ask! • Consult colleagues at your own library and other libraries.

5. Case Study 1: Peer Observation Who is being assessed? Teaching librarians Why is the assessment happening? Continuing professional development What will be done with findings? Individual librarians can make improvements/adjustments to teaching methods

6. Case Study 1: Peer Observation (Continued) Methodology: qualitative Measurement: None. This is a descriptive process. Collection method: Written

7. Case Study 1: Peer Observation (Continued) Developing the tool; what have others done? • Evolution of Peer Evaluation of Library Instruction at Oregon State University Libraries, Appendix A: IS Instruction & Training Checklist for Observations • Data Gathering Tools • Suggestions for Working with Your Peer Coach • Classroom Observation Worksheet • Peer Teaching: How to Get Started Tailoring to our own needs • Peer Observation Guidelines we developed

8. Case Study 2: WebCT Quiz Who or what is being assessed? Information literacy and library skills of students in introductory level classes; librarians who teach those sessions Why is the assessment happening? Directive from library administration What do you hope to do with your findings? Demonstrate effectiveness and importance of library instruction; improve teaching in these sessions

9. Case study 2: WebCT Quiz (Continued) Methodology: mix of qualitative and quantitative Measurement: Percentage of questions answered correctly Collection: Multiple choice/short answer online quiz delivered via course management software

10. Case study 2: WebCT Quiz (Continued) Developing tool • Committee formed • Literature review conducted • Examined samples from other initiatives • Consulted ARCL Standards for Information Literacy http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlstandards/informationliteracycompetency.cfm • Vetted through colleagues

15. What else have we put in our toolbox? Instruction Assessment • SurveyMonkey quiz for UNIV classes (Nadine Cohen) tinyurl.com/7kek7/tinyurl.com/qguh6/ • Half-sheet written evaluation for introductory science classes (Monica Pereira) www.libs.uga.edu/ref/evalform.pdf • Clear/muddy cards (Laura Shedenhelm)

16. Our colleagues’ toolboxes Other assessment initiatives at UGA Libraries • LibQual – Survey developed by ARL to assess and improve service in the Libraries. • Focus groups for website usability • SLC use of building (focus groups & surveys) • Science Library User Satisfaction Survey • Collection Development faculty needs survey • Library Faculty Job Satisfaction Survey http://dataserv.libs.uga.edu/assessment/activities.html

17. Go get your fingernails dirty Assessment doesn’t have to be painful. Assessment for assessment’s sake will never be fun. But if you go into it with a clear expectation of how you will use your results, everything else will fall into place. Good luck, and sharp tools are safe tools.